Meaning of Life - Armor Games Community

63	14313

offline

thestuntman

303 posts

Nomad

Posted April 4, '11 5:16pm UTC

and i find those scientists who claim that 97% of DNA is junk COMPLETE AND UTTER RETARDS
just because they can explain wat 3% does and the rest they cant

I would like to see source on where scientists say it's useless. I know that they don't fully understand the function of the "excess" DNA, but I doubt they think it's useless. It's like having a plane with engines, wings and a body. But not understanding what the engine does.

Back to the original topic.
I have to agree with E1337 on this one. There is no real meaning to human life. If the all life in the Universe were to disappear in a single instant, the Universe wouldn't shed a tear.

ok then what is stopping you from killing yourself right now? you contradict yourself

Nonetheless, as a part of biology, we naturally fear death. It's perfectly natural for something that's alive to want to extend its life span for as long as possible. Just because I, like E1337, realize that life has no true meaning, doesn't mean I want to die. I still feel pleasure and pain even though in the long run it means nothing.

[quote]and i find those scientists who claim that 97% of DNA is junk COMPLETE AND UTTER RETARDS\r\njust because they can explain wat 3% does and the rest they cant[/quote]\r\n\r\nI would like to see source on where scientists say it's useless. I know that they don't fully understand the function of the "excess" DNA, but I doubt they think it's useless. It's like having a plane with engines, wings and a body. But not understanding what the engine does.\r\n\r\nBack to the original topic.\r\nI have to agree with E1337 on this one. There is no real meaning to human life. If the all life in the Universe were to disappear in a single instant, the Universe wouldn't shed a tear. \r\n\r\n[quote]ok then what is stopping you from killing yourself right now? you contradict yourself[/quote]\r\n\r\nNonetheless, as a part of biology, we naturally fear death. It's perfectly natural for something that's alive to want to extend its life span for as long as possible. Just because I, like E1337, realize that life has no true meaning, doesn't mean I want to die. I still feel pleasure and pain even though in the long run it means nothing.

offline

DDX

3,562 posts

Nomad

Posted April 4, '11 5:35pm UTC

I still feel pleasure and pain even though in the long run it means nothing.

so then you would be saying that people live life for pleasure. because really if you think about it if something does not have meaning, why continue to use/possess it. Just for once drop the sciences and think philosophically, meaning is derived from what we assign it to be. so lets say your dad gave you a pen and he passed away, you finished using the pen (all the ink is gone) would you throw it away? most likely not because you assign meaning to the pen

Nonetheless, as a part of biology, we naturally fear death

going to say that we fear death because it is the unknown rather than purely biological. when you were younger do you remember being scared of the dark? why? because you didn't know what was lurking there. you take away the form of an object (you can't see the outlines of things in the dark) then it loses it's meaning. a table is no longer a table in the dark much less a table when it is a pile of wood and nails. THe form of an object as plato puts it denotes the goodness. What is death then? idk. i know as much that is has no form or structure. i.e. fear of death. what keeps you living is the fear of death? then that could also be a meaning to life as experience you cling on too dearly to life because there is something there you have not experienced, whether it be true love or college life of eating ramen all day, i do not know. but people who live their lives without meaning generally do not live at all

Does it really have to exist something, just because we would like it to exist? Egoist.

i see you would be taking epicurus' egoist approach on the view of life where you are living for the sake of pleasure, that's a very interesting view. I for one believed in the living for the sake of pleasure and pleasure only, however my views changed as i met someone special.

I am interested in anything that explains how the world came to be, scientifically of course. I keep striving for answers about evolution.

HahiHa just so you know science can only provide the quantity of answers, and not the quality. it doesnt tell us why we exist, but it can tell us what we are composed of, this is where philosophy comes into play. being a bio major i was quite skeptical of this at first because i've been a christian, then an atheist then a deist. I for one cannot provide the evidence that there is no god or that there is one on either extreme, however something happened couple billion years ago (not 6 thousand. thats just....) but something did and looking at the state of the world today god, if there is one, is one helluva good troll [against christianity link]

[quote]I still feel pleasure and pain even though in the long run it means nothing.[/quote]\r\n\r\nso then you would be saying that people live life for pleasure. because really if you think about it if something does not have meaning, why continue to use/possess it. Just for once drop the sciences and think philosophically, meaning is derived from what we assign it to be. so lets say your dad gave you a pen and he passed away, you finished using the pen (all the ink is gone) would you throw it away? most likely not because you assign meaning to the pen\r\n\r\n[quote]Nonetheless, as a part of biology, we naturally fear death[/quote]\r\n\r\ngoing to say that we fear death because it is the unknown rather than purely biological. when you were younger do you remember being scared of the dark? why? because you didn't know what was lurking there. you take away the form of an object (you can't see the outlines of things in the dark) then it loses it's meaning. a table is no longer a table in the dark much less a table when it is a pile of wood and nails. THe form of an object as plato puts it denotes the goodness. What is death then? idk. i know as much that is has no form or structure. i.e. fear of death. what keeps you living is the fear of death? then that could also be a meaning to life as experience you cling on too dearly to life because there is something there you have not experienced, whether it be true love or college life of eating ramen all day, i do not know. but people who live their lives without meaning generally do not live at all\r\n\r\n[quote]Does it really have to exist something, just because we would like it to exist? Egoist.[/quote]\r\n\r\ni see you would be taking epicurus' egoist approach on the view of life where you are living for the sake of pleasure, that's a very interesting view. I for one believed in the living for the sake of pleasure and pleasure only, however my views changed as i met someone special.\r\n\r\n[quote]I am interested in anything that explains how the world came to be, scientifically of course. I keep striving for answers about evolution. [/quote]\r\n\r\nHahiHa just so you know science can only provide the quantity of answers, and not the quality. it doesnt tell us why we exist, but it can tell us what we are composed of, this is where philosophy comes into play. being a bio major i was quite skeptical of this at first because i've been a christian, then an atheist then a deist. I for one cannot provide the evidence that there is no god or that there is one on either extreme, however something happened couple billion years ago (not 6 thousand. thats just....) but something did and looking at the state of the world today god, if there is one, is one helluva good troll [url=http://i.imgur.com/WJ2vU.jpg] [against christianity link][/url]

offline

Sonatavarius

1,322 posts

Farmer

Posted April 4, '11 5:38pm UTC

what I see here is the fallacy of bibidi babbidy boo....

significance does not equal meaning w/ this regard. the two are unrelated here. significance by your definition is the ratio of our part of the universe that we collectively fill compared to the rest. Meaning here is asking why we're here or what it is that we are supposed to do (if you see meaning = to purpose)

either there is a higher power that has remained imperceptible to us (either hiding and watching or long gone(or maybe some truly do communicate w/ him/them) that either doesn't care or is orchestrating things behind the scenes.... or there is no such entity and the meaning behind life is just random chance and due to random interactions between universal loaves (1 take on it)

you're saying that just because we're so small compared to the rest of the universe that if there is a meaning that it doesn't matter... still doesn't answer the question of what the irrelevant meaning is.

I know this is referring to something a page or two ago... I just don't like those diagrams and how they're used in this instance. but that's irrelevant in the grand scheme of things

words have multiple definitions... therefore in some instances def 1 =/= def 2. there are instances where significance is interchangeable w/ meaning (ie what's the significance/meaning) behind this sentence in Hamlet). that wasn't how it was used here. ...just for those that are gonna cite internets dictionary definitions that say significance = meaning or have one or the other word w/ in their own definition.

and vestigial structures once had meaning and purpose btw... they're just on their evolutionary route to leaving the structure of the body.

what I see here is the fallacy of bibidi babbidy boo....\r\n\r\nsignificance does not equal meaning w/ this regard. the two are unrelated here.  significance by your definition is the ratio of our part of the universe that we collectively fill compared to the rest.  Meaning here is asking why we're here or what it is that we are supposed to do (if you see meaning = to purpose) \r\n\r\neither there is a higher power that has remained imperceptible to us (either hiding and watching or long gone(or maybe some truly do communicate w/ him/them) that either doesn't care or is orchestrating things behind the scenes.... or there is no such entity and the meaning behind life is just random chance and due to random interactions between universal loaves (1 take on it)\r\n\r\nyou're saying that just because we're so small compared to the rest of the universe that if there is a meaning that it doesn't matter... still doesn't answer the question of what the irrelevant meaning is.  \r\n\r\nI know this is referring to something a page or two ago... I just don't like those diagrams and how they're used in this instance. but that's irrelevant in the grand scheme of things\r\n\r\nwords have multiple definitions... therefore in some instances def 1 =/= def 2.  there are instances where significance is interchangeable w/ meaning (ie what's the significance/meaning) behind this sentence in Hamlet). that wasn't how it was used here.  ...just for those that are gonna cite internets dictionary definitions that say significance = meaning  or have one or the other word w/ in their own definition.\r\n\r\n\r\nand vestigial structures once had meaning and purpose btw... they're just on their evolutionary route to leaving the structure of the body.

offline

sosedov

7 posts

Nomad

Posted April 4, '11 5:40pm UTC

to thestuntman
"I would like to see source on where scientists say it's useless."
from our beloved and most trusted source, the wikipedia:

"Junk DNA, a term that was introduced in 1972 by SUSUMU OHNO was a provisional label for the portions of a genome sequence for which no discernible function had been identified. According to a 1980 review in Nature by Leslie Orgel and Francis Crick, junk DNA has "little specificity and conveys little or no selective advantage to the organism". The term is currently, however, an outdated concept, being used mainly in popular science and in a colloquial way in scientific publications, and may have slowed research into the biological functions of noncoding DNA. Several lines of evidence indicate that many "junk DNA" sequences are likely to have unidentified functional activity, and other sequences may have had functions in the past."

perhaps nowadays scientists are becoming less ego-centric and all knowing. they begin to doubt and give a chance to things to have a meaning even if they dont know what it is at the moment.
weren't the scientists the ones who used to tell us that the world is flat and that sun rotates around earth?
so its fair to say that science cannot be a reliable source for information and discussion because it constantly changing its beleifs. (on the contrary a person who believes is god - such person is more reliable, since he doesnt flip-flop his ideas throughout his life.)

to HahiHa
Does it really have to exist something, just because we would like it to exist? Egoist.

i admit , i am an egoist, i do want there to be a meaning, and i am certain that there is a meaning!
why would i live if there is no meaning? well why do egoists live? they keep holding onto bits of pleasure... but basically its pointless - ur whole life is pointless. u only live for pleasure - other than that its pointless. now the problem is, can i be satisfied with cars, money, sex and food? how long can a child play the toys till he gets bored? probably till he gets older. now, the cars and homes (and cloth) are the SAME toys. and im tired of playing!!

to E1337 "Then you won't mind linking me to their methodology, data tables, there chi square distrubution tables and the like."

no i dont mind, except at the moment im strapped on time but ill definitely get back to u if ur truly interested.
howver u can just search for the Zohar - the 2000 year old book stated the earth was round, predicted both world wars and warns of others
and much more.

to thestuntman\r\n"I would like to see source on where scientists say it's useless."\r\nfrom our beloved and most trusted source, the wikipedia:\r\n\r\n"Junk DNA, a term that was introduced in 1972 by SUSUMU OHNO was a provisional label for the portions of a genome sequence for which no discernible function had been identified. According to a 1980 review in Nature by Leslie Orgel and Francis Crick, junk DNA has "little specificity and conveys little or no selective advantage to the organism". The term is currently, however, an outdated concept, being used mainly in popular science and in a colloquial way in scientific publications, and may have slowed research into the biological functions of noncoding DNA. Several lines of evidence indicate that many "junk DNA" sequences are likely to have unidentified functional activity, and other sequences may have had functions in the past."\r\n\r\nperhaps nowadays scientists are becoming less ego-centric and all knowing. they begin to doubt and give a chance to things to have a meaning even if they dont know what it is at the moment.\r\nweren't the scientists the ones who used to tell us that the world is flat and that sun rotates around earth?\r\nso its fair to say that science cannot be a reliable source for information and discussion because it constantly changing its beleifs. (on the contrary a person who believes is god - such person is more reliable, since he doesnt flip-flop his ideas throughout his life.)\r\n\r\nto HahiHa\r\nDoes it really have to exist something, just because we would like it to exist? Egoist.\r\n\r\ni admit , i am an egoist, i do want there to be a meaning, and i am certain that there is a meaning!\r\nwhy would i live if there is no meaning? well why do egoists live? they keep holding onto bits of pleasure... but basically its pointless - ur whole life is pointless. u only live for pleasure - other than that its pointless. now the problem is, can i be satisfied with cars, money, sex and food? how long can a child play the toys till he gets bored? probably till he gets older. now, the cars and homes (and cloth) are the SAME toys. and im tired of playing!!\r\n\r\nto E1337  "Then you won't mind linking me to their methodology, data tables, there chi square distrubution tables and the like."\r\n\r\nno i dont mind, except at the moment im strapped on time but ill definitely get back to u if ur truly interested. \r\nhowver u can just search for the Zohar - the 2000 year old book  stated the earth was round, predicted both world wars and warns of others\r\nand much more.

offline

DDX

3,562 posts

Nomad

Posted April 4, '11 5:40pm UTC

Furthermore, PMSing is used to describe someone being pissy and is denotes the user is effiminate. Honestly, does the concept of slang pass over your head?

no i got it, it just shows how immature you are resorting to childish insults when i point out that your accusations fall short of their intended meaning

2. Vestigal organs are still useless and only slowly dissapearing overtime.
Vestige, a non-functional organ or body part that was once functional in an evolutionary ancestor

yea i know. i took bio when you were stil wetnursed.

1. The percentages are meant to show the majority of our DNA is shared, the difference is a tiny fraction of genes and interaction of said genes with Methly groups.

yes shared there are also different number of chromosomes why didnt you also try and show that and if you compare 900 million and 1 billion theres a 100 million difference even though they share 90% of whatever.

DDX, seriously need to work on reading comprehension and context.

I do not actually, you just need to stop being rude and vague

[quote]Furthermore, PMSing is used to describe someone being pissy and is denotes the user is effiminate. Honestly, does the concept of slang pass over your head?[/quote]\r\nno i got it, it just shows how immature you are resorting to childish insults when i point out that your accusations fall short of their intended meaning\r\n[quote]2. Vestigal organs are still useless and only slowly dissapearing overtime.\r\nVestige,  a non-functional organ or body part that was once functional in an evolutionary ancestor[/quote]\r\nyea i know. i took bio when you were stil wetnursed.\r\n\r\n[quote]1. The percentages are meant to show the majority of our DNA is shared, the difference is a tiny fraction of genes and interaction of said genes with Methly groups.[/quote]\r\nyes shared there are also different number of chromosomes why didnt you also try and show that and if you compare 900 million and 1 billion theres a 100 million difference even though they share 90% of whatever.\r\n\r\n[quote]DDX, seriously need to work on reading comprehension and context.[/quote]\r\nI do not actually, you just need to stop being rude and vague

offline

HahiHa

8,256 posts

Regent

Posted April 4, '11 5:44pm UTC

i see you would be taking epicurus' egoist approach on the view of life where you are living for the sake of pleasure, that's a very interesting view. I for one believed in the living for the sake of pleasure and pleasure only, however my views changed as i met someone special.

Heh. Nice turning egoism back to me XD You're basically not wrong, but I'm not saying my goal in life is to reach as much pleasure and fun as possible, and I think I know what you mean with your special someone; you don't want to live only for yourself anymore. That's alright with me. My only point is that nothing dictates such things, it's basically your choice.

HahiHa just so you know science can only provide the quantity of answers, and not the quality. it doesnt tell us why we exist, but it can tell us what we are composed of, this is where philosophy comes into play.

I know it won't answer the why, because there is no why. I'm only interested in the how, because I think it is fascinating.

[quote]i see you would be taking epicurus' egoist approach on the view of life where you are living for the sake of pleasure, that's a very interesting view. I for one believed in the living for the sake of pleasure and pleasure only, however my views changed as i met someone special.[/quote]\r\nHeh. Nice turning egoism back to me XD You're basically not wrong, but I'm not saying my goal in life is to reach as much pleasure and fun as possible, and I think I know what you mean with your special someone; you don't want to live only for yourself anymore. That's alright with me. My only point is that nothing dictates such things, it's basically your choice. \r\n\r\n[quote]HahiHa just so you know science can only provide the quantity of answers, and not the quality. it doesnt tell us why we exist, but it can tell us what we are composed of, this is where philosophy comes into play. [/quote]\r\nI know it won't answer the [i]why[/i], because there is no [i]why[/i]. I'm only interested in the [i]how[/i], because I think it is fascinating.

offline

thestuntman

303 posts

Nomad

Posted April 4, '11 5:46pm UTC

so then you would be saying that people live life for pleasure. because really if you think about it if something does not have meaning, why continue to use/possess it.

You never really refuted my statement in this paragraph. Of course I wouldn't throw away the pen, but that's because even though it's out of ink I would still gain pleasure from it. Men don't assign value to their nipples, does that mean we should just chop them off?

going to say that we fear death because it is the unknown rather than purely biological.

There is a biological aspect to it. Animals with no cognitive thought, seek to extend their lifespan, and the same applies to humans. You have a point that humans do fear the unknown to an extent. Nonetheless, I don't fear death because I assign meaning to my life. I understand that once I die, it'll just be nothingness. Even so, fearing death because you weren't able to find the pleasures you sought in life is perfectly reasonable. But it does not mean that your life has meaning.

[quote]so then you would be saying that people live life for pleasure. because really if you think about it if something does not have meaning, why continue to use/possess it.[/quote]\r\n\r\nYou never really refuted my statement in this paragraph. Of course I wouldn't throw away the pen, but that's because even though it's out of ink I would still gain pleasure from it. Men don't assign value to their nipples, does that mean we should just chop them off?\r\n\r\n[quote]going to say that we fear death because it is the unknown rather than purely biological.[/quote]\r\n\r\nThere is a biological aspect to it. Animals with no cognitive thought, seek to extend their lifespan, and the same applies to humans. You have a point that humans do fear the unknown to an extent. Nonetheless, I don't fear death because I assign meaning to my life. I understand that once I die, it'll just be nothingness. Even so, fearing death because you weren't able to find the pleasures you sought in life is perfectly reasonable. But it does not mean that your life has meaning.

offline

sosedov

7 posts

Nomad

Posted April 4, '11 5:50pm UTC

to DDX
"I still feel pleasure and pain even though in the long run it means nothing.

so then you would be saying that people live life for pleasure. because really if you think about it if something does not have meaning, why continue to use/possess it"

how about u give me another rationale for living other than pleasure?
ANYTHING and EVERYTHING you is with a count that you will receive pleasure or relief from it. maybe not instantly, but all we do is guided by pleasure. now PLEASURE is subjective - peace of mind, orgasm, feeling in control

so there u go
how about u give me a single example that one does something to achieve "PAIN"? unless its of course for pleasure.

so in fact we dont have a FREEDOM of choice. its an illusion!
all we are choosing from are DIFFERENT pleasures. but in fact we are SLAVES to our EGOS. we are just a sensor that is teared apart between pleasure and pain. we have as much freedom as "Paramecium caudatum" - we instinctively move away from darkness/pain to light/pleasure. even our natural instincts dont let us kill ourselves

now. wat if i cant satisfy my ego with anything on earth?
time to evolve....

to DDX\r\n"I still feel pleasure and pain even though in the long run it means nothing.\r\n\r\nso then you would be saying that people live life for pleasure. because really if you think about it if something does not have meaning, why continue to use/possess it"\r\n\r\nhow about u give me another rationale for living other than pleasure?\r\nANYTHING and EVERYTHING you is with a count that you will receive pleasure or relief from it. maybe not instantly, but all we do is guided by pleasure. now PLEASURE is subjective - peace of mind, orgasm, feeling in control\r\n\r\nso there u go\r\nhow about u give me a single example that one does something to achieve "PAIN"? unless its of course for pleasure.\r\n\r\nso in fact we dont have a FREEDOM of choice. its an illusion!\r\nall we are choosing from are DIFFERENT pleasures. but in fact we are SLAVES to our EGOS. we are just a sensor that is teared apart between pleasure and pain. we have as much freedom as "Paramecium caudatum" - we instinctively move away from darkness/pain to light/pleasure. even our natural instincts dont let us kill ourselves\r\n\r\n\r\nnow. wat if i cant satisfy my ego with anything on earth?\r\ntime to evolve....

offline

thestuntman

303 posts

Nomad

Posted April 4, '11 5:54pm UTC

weren't the scientists the ones who used to tell us that the world is flat and that sun rotates around earth?

Actually, it was both scientists and the Church that said that the sun rotates around the earth. The Church resisted the change to a heliocentric model.

In response to the Junk DNA. Just because it's called Junk DNA doesn't mean it's useless. The functions have yet to be discovered. You're reading into the name too much.

offline

sosedov

7 posts

Nomad

Posted April 4, '11 5:55pm UTC

to Hahiha and DDx
"i see you would be taking epicurus' egoist approach on the view of life where you are living for the sake of pleasure, that's a very interesting view. I for one believed in the living for the sake of pleasure and pleasure only, however my views changed as i met someone special.

Heh. Nice turning egoism back to me XD You're basically not wrong, but I'm not saying my goal in life is to reach as much pleasure and fun as possible, and I think I know what you mean with your special someone; you don't want to live only for yourself anymore. That's alright with me. My only point is that nothing dictates such things, it's basically your choice."

quit fooling urself guys. loving "special one" is an EGOISTIC love. like u want to be loved back? u need it for sex, emotions, family feeling, feeling of security and saneness's that ur not alone

also, a mother loving a child is egoistic love. its HER child afterall....

offline

HahiHa

8,256 posts

Regent

Posted April 4, '11 6:03pm UTC

To sosedov
I don't believe in altruism as such, at least not in absolute altruism, and I'm the last one to think that there is no egoism to every action. But you still get the feeling to care for somebody, you don't consciously think "hey, let's be egoist and act nice to that girl". A mother loving a child would never think, never dream of saying it is egoistic, even if it is. But that's rather irrelevant. If that's what you want to hear: yes I do live for the pleasure. Who does not? We are all egoists.

And PLEASE use quotes next time...

offline

DDX

3,562 posts

Nomad

Posted April 4, '11 6:14pm UTC

That's alright with me. My only point is that nothing dictates such things, it's basically your choice.

exactly which is why my views went from faith to purely live for the experience. I dont know if im going to be reincarnated, go to some fictional cloud house or an eternal bbq. we're living life purely for the reason that it is a once in a lifetime experience, literally.

I know it won't answer the why, because there is no why. I'm only interested in the how, because I think it is fascinating.

i'm also interested in the how, like currently in organic chem, studying carbon bonding structures and it's because carbon works this certain way that we end up being ablt to exist.

technically there is a why, there is just no right answer because it isnt feasible through human thought at this moment anyway

There is a biological aspect to it. Animals with no cognitive thought, seek to extend their lifespan,

true, that would be nature's instinct but as humans from a philosophical standpoint we shouldn't be compared to animals because of their lack of cognitive ability. humans have virtues and have rational thought, whereas animals are driven by their appetite soul.

Nonetheless, I don't fear death because I assign meaning to my life

excellent, another Epicurean

what i mean by that is that Epicurus also said that we should not fear death because death cannot affect the life because we are still living, and in death we have no cognitive reason.

how about u give me a single example that one does something to achieve "PAIN"? unless its of course for pleasure.

im in college right now working every day so i can be a doctor and save people which i will derive my pleasure from. Stuart Mill, another hedonist believed that the ultimate goal is pleasure and the highest pleasures should be pursued even if pain is involved

so then you would be saying that people live life for pleasure. because really if you think about it if something does not have meaning, why continue to use/possess it"

well think about it, (aristotle, mill, and epicurus) believed in the final end of pleasure. Why you do something is inherently based on pleasure, when you buy a house, it keeps you out of the rain, so you can be dry, so you can live there and have a place to return so you can be happy. etc. all actions lead to happiness or rather all goals lead to happiness

so in fact we dont have a FREEDOM of choice. its an illusion!

yes freedom is an illusion, the more choices you have actually hinders your decision to make a choice. how many times have you just stood there looking at a menu trying to decide what you wanted?

all we are choosing from are DIFFERENT pleasures. but in fact we are SLAVES to our EGOS

that depends on how you view things but in a sense quite possibly many people are indeed slaves to their egos, however if you have temperance as aristotle believed it was rational control over the appetitive soul you can not be a slave to your own ego

now. wat if i cant satisfy my ego with anything on earth?
time to evolve....

first of all... LOL

ok moving on, you would be correct, if you look at tyrants, they can have anything they want, is that true happiness? they can have all the women, food, etc, anything and Plato argues in his republic that the lack of control of our egos (Aristotle's appetitive soul) we can see that we would become slaves to our desires and eventually collapse. basically, time to evolve

Actually, it was both scientists and the Church that said that the sun rotates around the earth. The Church resisted the change to a heliocentric model.

right, and to the question you were responding to, those were not technically scientists per se because science was not an established practice, science stems from philosophy which at the time believed in the aristotle model of the universe (4 elements, earth centric)

quit fooling urself guys. loving "special one" is an EGOISTIC love. like u want to be loved back? u need it for sex, emotions, family feeling, feeling of security and saneness's that ur not alone

very true however in different times in a relationship probably initially it would be egotistical, however when you get to the point where you could sacrifice yourself for that person, you've reached a higher level, because self sacrifice is the only outlier in the egocentric universe.

also, a mother loving a child is egoistic love. its HER child afterall....

again very true, but what about philanthropy? and those who foster children? arguably they could do it to fill a void, but really they could be doing it for the sake of duty to the world.

wow thank god my lunch break is 2 hours today...

[quote]That's alright with me. My only point is that nothing dictates such things, it's basically your choice. [/quote]\r\nexactly which is why my views went from faith to purely live for the experience. I dont know if im going to be reincarnated, go to some fictional cloud house or an eternal bbq. we're living life purely for the reason that it is a once in a lifetime experience, literally. \r\n\r\n[quote]I know it won't answer the why, because there is no why. I'm only interested in the how, because I think it is fascinating.[/quote]\r\ni'm also interested in the how, like currently in organic chem, studying carbon bonding structures and it's because carbon works this certain way that we end up being ablt to exist.\r\n\r\ntechnically there is a why, there is just no right answer because it isnt feasible through human thought at this moment anyway\r\n\r\n[quote]There is a biological aspect to it. Animals with no cognitive thought, seek to extend their lifespan,[/quote]\r\n\r\ntrue, that would be nature's instinct but as humans from a philosophical standpoint we shouldn't be compared to animals because of their lack of cognitive ability. humans have virtues and have rational thought, whereas animals are driven by their appetite soul.\r\n\r\n[quote]Nonetheless, I don't fear death because I assign meaning to my life[/quote]\r\n\r\nexcellent, another Epicurean\r\n\r\nwhat i mean by that is that Epicurus also said that we should not fear death because death cannot affect the life because we are still living, and in death we have no cognitive reason.\r\n\r\n[quote]how about u give me a single example that one does something to achieve "PAIN"? unless its of course for pleasure.[/quote]\r\nim in college right now working every day so i can be a doctor and save people which i will derive my pleasure from. Stuart Mill, another hedonist believed that the ultimate goal is pleasure and the highest pleasures should be pursued even if pain is involved\r\n\r\n[quote]so then you would be saying that people live life for pleasure. because really if you think about it if something does not have meaning, why continue to use/possess it"[/quote]\r\nwell think about it, (aristotle, mill, and epicurus) believed in the final end of pleasure. Why you do something is inherently based on pleasure, when you buy a house, it keeps you out of the rain, so you can be dry, so you can live there and have a place to return so you can be happy. etc. all actions lead to happiness or rather all goals lead to happiness\r\n\r\n[quote]so in fact we dont have a FREEDOM of choice. its an illusion![/quote]\r\n\r\nyes freedom is an illusion, the more choices you have actually hinders your decision to make a choice. how many times have you just stood there looking at a menu trying to decide what you wanted?\r\n\r\n[quote]all we are choosing from are DIFFERENT pleasures. but in fact we are SLAVES to our EGOS[/quote]\r\nthat depends on how you view things but in a sense quite possibly many people are indeed slaves to their egos, however if you have temperance as aristotle believed it was rational control over the appetitive soul you can not be a slave to your own ego\r\n\r\n[quote]now. wat if i cant satisfy my ego with anything on earth?\r\ntime to evolve....[/quote]\r\nfirst of all... LOL\r\n\r\nok moving on, you would be correct, if you look at tyrants, they can have anything they want, is that true happiness? they can have all the women, food, etc, anything and Plato argues in his republic that the lack of control of our egos (Aristotle's appetitive soul) we can see that we would become slaves to our desires and eventually collapse. basically, time to evolve \r\n\r\n[quote]Actually, it was both scientists and the Church that said that the sun rotates around the earth. The Church resisted the change to a heliocentric model.[/quote]\r\n\r\nright, and to the question you were responding to, those were not technically scientists per se because science was not an established practice, science stems from philosophy which at the time believed in the aristotle model of the universe (4 elements, earth centric)\r\n\r\n[quote]quit fooling urself guys. loving "special one" is an EGOISTIC love. like u want to be loved back? u need it for sex, emotions, family feeling, feeling of security and saneness's that ur not alone[/quote]\r\nvery true however in different times in a relationship probably initially it would be egotistical, however when you get to the point where you could sacrifice yourself for that person, you've reached a higher level, because self sacrifice is the only outlier in the egocentric universe.\r\n\r\n[quote]also, a mother loving a child is egoistic love. its HER child afterall....[/quote]\r\nagain very true, but what about philanthropy? and those who foster children? arguably they could do it to fill a void, but really they could be doing it for the sake of duty to the world.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nwow thank god my lunch break is 2 hours today...

offline

valkery

1,255 posts

Nomad

Posted April 4, '11 10:22pm UTC

Gonna jump right in here and not bother with quoting some of the things I have read, just for the sake of my time.

Anyway, as said before, the meaning of life is all dependent on how you personally view the world. If you want to get down to the individual anyway...

Overall, I don't really think that there is a meaning to life. We can deliberate over it on an online gaming website, or we could go out and shout our opinions to the world. It won't matter since every person on the planet views it differently.

If you bring a god into the mix, then you get alternating world views that are supposedly supposed to be upheld by every person depending on their religion or view of the world. I hear all the time that there is a secular world view and a christian world view. There is also a Mormon world view, a Muslim world view, and any religion or belief that there may be in the world, world view. It really is subjective to what each person feels and to be arrogant enough to think that there is a blanket "meaning to life" makes the living experience much more insignificant thatn if you just let everyone come up with their own ideas.

Yes, there may be a blanketing "meaning to life" and that meaning may very well be procreating or something as anamalistic as that, but you can't really know for sure, since every person has to come to their own seperate conclusion to make the idea of "living with a purpose" work in even the slightest.

Gonna jump right in here and not bother with quoting some of the things I have read, just for the sake of my time.\r\n\r\nAnyway, as said before, the meaning of life is all dependent on how you personally view the world. If you want to get down to the individual anyway...\r\n\r\nOverall, I don't really think that there is a meaning to life. We can deliberate over it on an online gaming website, or we could go out and shout our opinions to the world. It won't matter since every person on the planet views it differently.\r\n\r\nIf you bring a god into the mix, then you get alternating world views that are supposedly supposed to be upheld by every person depending on their religion or view of the world. I hear all the time that there is a secular world view and a christian world view. There is also a Mormon world view, a Muslim world view, and any religion or belief that there may be in the world, world view. It really is subjective to what each person feels and to be arrogant enough to think that there is a blanket "meaning to life" makes the living experience much more insignificant thatn if you just let everyone come up with their own ideas.\r\n\r\nYes, there may be a blanketing "meaning to life" and that meaning may very well be procreating or something as anamalistic as that, but you can't really know for sure, since every person has to come to their own seperate conclusion to make the idea of "living with a purpose" work in even the slightest.

offline

DDX

3,562 posts

Nomad

Posted April 4, '11 11:05pm UTC

Overall, I don't really think that there is a meaning to life. We can deliberate over it on an online gaming website, or we could go out and shout our opinions to the world. It won't matter since every person on the planet views it differently.

never said there was a distinct definition to the meaning of life. the point of philosophy is debate and analysis to try and answer the unanswerable qualitative questions of the universe.
if you find no meaning in life then i ask you the same thing, what prevents you from just killing yourself right now? obviously at least to yourself your life has meaning.

you are aware that the earth was not only determined to be flat but it's circumference calcuted to within a couple hundred miles by the ancient greeks?

Or the fact that, as in all ancient texts, the prophecies were vauge enough to be applied to everything.

? ? ? ? ?
I never said that their sciences were correct, I simply respect their thinking. and i did not refer to any prophecies rather their word of thought written down in text.

It really is subjective to what each person feels and to be arrogant enough to think that there is a blanket "meaning to life" makes the living experience much more insignificant thatn if you just let everyone come up with their own ideas.

right, and i want to hear those ideas. and those ideas that they have just so happen to fall under certain philosophers which i thought it would be nice to point out. i never said they were wrong but it just merely interesting to know that you share the same ideas as certain great thinkers of the past. also didnt blanket the meaning of life. you misread. I wanted to know the values and virtues of other people and what they attribute to the meaning of life.

[quote]Overall, I don't really think that there is a meaning to life. We can deliberate over it on an online gaming website, or we could go out and shout our opinions to the world. It won't matter since every person on the planet views it differently.[/quote]\r\n\r\nnever said there was a distinct definition to the meaning of life. the point of philosophy is debate and analysis to try and answer the unanswerable qualitative questions of the universe.\r\nif you find no meaning in life then i ask you the same thing, what prevents you from just killing yourself right now? obviously at least to yourself your life has meaning.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n[quote]\r\nyou are aware that the earth was not only determined to be flat but it's circumference calcuted to within a couple hundred miles by the ancient greeks?\r\n\r\nOr the fact that, as in all ancient texts, the prophecies were vauge enough to be applied to everything.\r\n[/quote]\r\n? ? ? ? ?\r\nI never said that their sciences were correct, I simply respect their thinking. and i did not refer to any prophecies rather their word of thought written down in text.\r\n\r\n\r\n[quote]It really is subjective to what each person feels and to be arrogant enough to think that there is a blanket "meaning to life" makes the living experience much more insignificant thatn if you just let everyone come up with their own ideas.[/quote]\r\n\r\nright, and i want to hear those ideas. and those ideas that they have just so happen to fall under certain philosophers which i thought it would be nice to point out. i never said they were wrong but it just merely interesting to know that you share the same ideas as certain great thinkers of the past. also didnt blanket the meaning of life. you misread. I wanted to know the values and virtues of other people and what they attribute to the meaning of life.

offline

Carter

107 posts

Nomad

Posted April 4, '11 11:10pm UTC

to live a life full of meaning

Categories

Quests

Community

Forums → WEPR → Meaning of Life