Philosophy
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: July 8th, 2022, 3:14 am
Philosophy
1. What is the Meaning of Life?
2. Does God Exist (and How)?
3. What is the Nature of Reality?
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: July 8th, 2022, 3:14 am
Re: Philosophy
I'm going to borrow this reply from the Postmodern thread; I hope you don't mind.Sy Borg wrote: ↑July 16th, 2022, 11:02 pmMeaning is a justification for life's travails, a sense that the positives outweigh the negatives.
When I was young I remember asking people about the meaning of life. The answer at that time was invariably, to have children. While being to unassertive to openly question this, it never satisfied. So what was the point of the children's' lives? To have more children. At that time I did not know the concept of a Ponzi scheme. It reminded me of the explanation about what came before the Big Bang - nothing, they would say. Hawking famously said that it was like trying to say what's north of the north pole. That postmodern reply didn't satisfy my modernist mind either because what's north of the north pole is spacetime, which certainly does exist, even if we don't much care about it.
I digress. The meaning of life has been a concern of humanity's for millennia. And, as per the above, the notion even occurs to children. It seems odd that you ask about it, as though wondering about the meaning of life was something peculiar.
For the record, I liked Angelo Cannata's comment: 'I think the solution to this is just to admit: admit our limits, our preconceptions, our inability to be pure, free from biases.'
That appears to be the root of postmodernism - to remind modernists that they were no more gatekeepers of The Truth than theists, to seriously consider our limitations. As usual, some got carried away.
In other iterations of this topic, I tend to get that Redundant type of answer. Aspiring philosophers and thinkers, on these forums, tell me "The Meaning of Life is...Life!" Then I respond, "It's that simple?" They say, "Yes of course". Like Sy Borg, I'm not satisfied. The "Meaning" of a word or thing, is not the same thing. The meaning of a dog is not "dog". The meaning of a cat is not "cat". People need to say and think more. Explain and describe the thing. Dogs are very diverse, different sizes, weights, furs, colors, snouts, ears, functions, behaviors, compulsions, etc. The better the Answer, the more people agree and flock to higher wisdom.
When it comes to the Meaning of Life, the same principle applies. A Greatest Answer is required. A response that stuns, captivates, holds attention, and gravitates all people to it. It needs to be a Masterpiece.
If a person can do that, then to me, that is when we're starting to do Philosophy. That's when we begin to philosophize.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Philosophy
Trouble is, one person's masterpiece is another's hogwash. We agree that self-referential ideas about the meaning of life do not satisfy. (BTW, I know the meaning of dogs - to be awesome!)Wizard22 wrote: ↑July 17th, 2022, 3:29 amI'm going to borrow this reply from the Postmodern thread; I hope you don't mind.Sy Borg wrote: ↑July 16th, 2022, 11:02 pmMeaning is a justification for life's travails, a sense that the positives outweigh the negatives.
When I was young I remember asking people about the meaning of life. The answer at that time was invariably, to have children. While being to unassertive to openly question this, it never satisfied. So what was the point of the children's' lives? To have more children. At that time I did not know the concept of a Ponzi scheme. It reminded me of the explanation about what came before the Big Bang - nothing, they would say. Hawking famously said that it was like trying to say what's north of the north pole. That postmodern reply didn't satisfy my modernist mind either because what's north of the north pole is spacetime, which certainly does exist, even if we don't much care about it.
I digress. The meaning of life has been a concern of humanity's for millennia. And, as per the above, the notion even occurs to children. It seems odd that you ask about it, as though wondering about the meaning of life was something peculiar.
For the record, I liked Angelo Cannata's comment: 'I think the solution to this is just to admit: admit our limits, our preconceptions, our inability to be pure, free from biases.'
That appears to be the root of postmodernism - to remind modernists that they were no more gatekeepers of The Truth than theists, to seriously consider our limitations. As usual, some got carried away.
In other iterations of this topic, I tend to get that Redundant type of answer. Aspiring philosophers and thinkers, on these forums, tell me "The Meaning of Life is...Life!" Then I respond, "It's that simple?" They say, "Yes of course". Like Sy Borg, I'm not satisfied. The "Meaning" of a word or thing, is not the same thing. The meaning of a dog is not "dog". The meaning of a cat is not "cat". People need to say and think more. Explain and describe the thing. Dogs are very diverse, different sizes, weights, furs, colors, snouts, ears, functions, behaviors, compulsions, etc. The better the Answer, the more people agree and flock to higher wisdom.
When it comes to the Meaning of Life, the same principle applies. A Greatest Answer is required. A response that stuns, captivates, holds attention, and gravitates all people to it. It needs to be a Masterpiece.
If a person can do that, then to me, that is when we're starting to do Philosophy. That's when we begin to philosophize.
Seriously, why should the meaning of life be about what humans do? We are the most mentally sophisticated brings on Earth so far. Thus, it's likely that more mentally sophisticated beings will follow us. Development need not stop with them either. So it's turtles all the way up as well as down.
But the end game doesn't actually concern most people, whether they admit it or not. It's about a sense of meaning now, and in the short/medium term. For me, Camus provides the masterpiece, but some would no doubt think it hogwash :)
I leave Sisyphus at the foot of the mountain. One always finds one's burden again. But Sisyphus teaches the higher fidelity that negates the gods and raises rocks. He too concludes that all is well. This universe henceforth without a master seems to him neither sterile nor futile. Each atom of that stone, each mineral flake of that night-filled mountain, in itself, forms a world. The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: July 8th, 2022, 3:14 am
Re: Philosophy
I advocate for an Objective analysis of Meaning of Life. Life is Biological. If a man's life is meaningful, then so too is an animal's, so too is a dog's, an alligator's, a zebra's, a turtle's, etc. Subjectivity is a main problem, addressing this question. A Nihilist believes, "because *MY* life has no meaning, then nobody else's has meaning either" or worse, that "all life has no meaning!!!" So Meaning of Life should not be judged according to the absolute Negative, to Annihilation. Why does the Nihilist make such a big fuss? Because s/he is completely Demoralized, Hopeless, Directionless, without a Goal, without a Purpose, etc.
Yet, Nihilism is important in the sense, that sometimes you need to stare into Darkness, before you seek-out the Light, so-to-speak. After you see the Meaning in nothingness, then you can begin to appreciate the Meaning in everythingness.
The Meaning of Life can be answered more pragmatically too... some great men in human history have led millions of other men, whole nations, to Victory. Sometimes this means war, take it for what you will. Great thinkers, scientists, philosophers...great athletes, these ones are most convincing about a "Meaning of Life", or worthwhile Purpose. Most of humanity aspires to greatness, to Heroes and Legends.
Why is Alexander the Great heralded for so many millenniums beyond his death? How about Jesus Christ? Plato? Take your pick.
In some examples, a Meaningful Life, a Purposeful Life, is more obvious than everybody else who settles for less, not to say that a Common or Average life is without meaning...but certainly lesser, no?
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Philosophy
I think of "staring into the Darkness" as cutting the ego down to size. You hit the wall and no longer care, at which point everything starts getting better, if you let it.
We are ultimately part of a planet's journey from being a volcanic hell to today (so far), which is a mightily impressive achievement. We life forms are part of that, so we can feel pleased with ourselves, having struggled to this level of sophistication from mindless single-celled organisms over a few billion years.
Many of us anonymous types will disappear into the amorphous past soon after death, without the grand funerals, monuments, historical accounts and public mourning over Those That Matter - who are quite often rather ruthless, dishonest and destructive characters that we would not want to emulate.
Given the forum's current fascination with postmodernism, I'll go postmodern on this one and say that average lives are no less meaningful than those of VIPs. The differences between humans are enormously exaggerated due to anthropocentrism. Humans don't judge other humans against the rest of the environment, only against one another. This is efficacious, but primitive, thinking.
Humans have the capacity to see each other (and other life forms) as they really are - extraordinary beings of incredible complexity on an exceptional planet. They are miracles of nature with a one-in-trillions chance of existing. While our relativistic approach is practical (no point rewarding a thief for being an "extraordinary being") it's ontologically wrong. That's why people "get all cosmic" at death - they stop seeing reality in practical terms, because such practicalities are no longer applicable, and start perceiving their reality in a more ontically accurate way.
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: July 8th, 2022, 3:14 am
Re: Philosophy
Perhaps that is why history separates the wheat from the chaff, and raises them up as "Philosophers" compared to 'regular' Professors, Mentors, Teachers, and Educators. Wisdom does tend to concentrate, exponentially, in some few rare individuals. Perhaps many are overlooked and forgotten, Authors undiscovered by History, but that's another matter really.
When I talk about "Meaning", there is much throughout all other areas, professions, and expertise as well. Whether it be great Athleticism, Scientific Discovery, Space Exploration, etc. it becomes evident, to me, that some lives and pursuits are much more valuable & "meaningful" than others. There is a great deal of Apathy and even Disdain, among the commonplace, to live simple lives in Hedonism and Drug-abuse. While that may not be Meaningful per se, the liberals and hedonists tend to excuse such addictions and vices, consuming as they are, as "meaningful to them", as-if Subjectivity rules-out the option that a Common man or woman, justifies such lives of Apathy and "not trying".
How much of Humanity is "not trying", right now?
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Philosophy
Sometimes, however, the best thing a person can do is get out of the way of more driven or skilled people, to let them do what they do well. The difference is that one approach seeks wealth, power and self-aggrandisation, the other seeks harmony and overall effectiveness.
With automation and outsourcing, the services of most people now are simply not required. They are made redundant and removed from the work force. That does not make them objectively lesser than those who have been retained. As stated, many high achievers are destructive and selfish.
Humanity does not need to work harder. It would be more sustainable for people to work less, to settle down, but competition will ensure that won't happen.
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: July 8th, 2022, 3:14 am
Re: Philosophy
We have massive spaceships to build. We have Deep Space to explore. We have foreign Solar Systems to colonize and conquer.
Wasting life, pissing it down the drain, is the entirely wrong attitude to have going forward.
Why waste your life, when you have a new Choice, now?
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Philosophy
No, "we" are not building spaceships. "We" are not exploring deep space. And we certainly won't be getting anywhere near other solar systems.
A few companies and governmental space agencies are doing marvellous work in space, but those achievements are unrelated to us, and even more unrelated to drug use by young people rendered redundant by offshoring, outsourcing and automation.
* Heroine needles - when one aggravates brave female warriors?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Philosophy
I hate to break it to you but if all drug addicts quit tomorrow, the brainpower freed up would get us zero percent closer to space travel.Wizard22 wrote: ↑July 26th, 2022, 4:02 am I disagree, Humanity needs to get off the couch, put down the heroine needles, put down the crack rocks, put down the meth, get off its fat butt, and get to work.
We have massive spaceships to build. We have Deep Space to explore. We have foreign Solar Systems to colonize and conquer.
Wasting life, pissing it down the drain, is the entirely wrong attitude to have going forward.
Why waste your life, when you have a new Choice, now?
Or to put it another way, why are there so many homeless encampments when businesses can't get enough minimally skilled workers to keep up with demand?
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: July 8th, 2022, 3:14 am
Re: Philosophy
I disagree fundamentally.Sy Borg wrote: ↑July 26th, 2022, 9:06 pm Given that a minuscule proportion of people use "heroine needles" *, crack rocks and meth, you appear to be speaking to about 0.01% of the world's population. Will they see yourProtestant work ethic as The Ultimate Truth, or will they realise you are parrotting your preferred media organisations?
No, "we" are not building spaceships. "We" are not exploring deep space. And we certainly won't be getting anywhere near other solar systems.
A few companies and governmental space agencies are doing marvellous work in space, but those achievements are unrelated to us, and even more unrelated to drug use by young people rendered redundant by offshoring, outsourcing and automation.
* Heroine needles - when one aggravates brave female warriors?
Your defense of drug-addiction is noted. However, they do waste their lives. And they will admit that their lives are "Meaningless". That's their Admission, so you can debate with them why or how that is. But to most people, it's common sense. Hedonism is not enough, for a 'Meaningful' life. There's more to Life than this.
And on the next point, those who get in the way of true, genuine Human progress, will simply be stepped-over. Therefore, we WILL indeed build rocketships and spacecraft, we WILL explore the cosmos, we WILL colonize unknown solar systems.
Ask yourself, why are *you* so against this?? Is it because, by comparison, you fear that your life would come up short to such a Meaning or Purpose?
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: July 8th, 2022, 3:14 am
Re: Philosophy
The point is, that they shouldn't waste their lives to begin with...not how meaningful it is to recover and reject that lifestyle, which it is, meaningful to do so.LuckyR wrote: ↑July 27th, 2022, 1:22 pmI hate to break it to you but if all drug addicts quit tomorrow, the brainpower freed up would get us zero percent closer to space travel.
Or to put it another way, why are there so many homeless encampments when businesses can't get enough minimally skilled workers to keep up with demand?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Philosophy
We're in agreement that drug addiction is a bad thing. My point is that it generally is a symptom not the cause of a wasted life's potential.Wizard22 wrote: ↑July 29th, 2022, 3:42 amThe point is, that they shouldn't waste their lives to begin with...not how meaningful it is to recover and reject that lifestyle, which it is, meaningful to do so.LuckyR wrote: ↑July 27th, 2022, 1:22 pmI hate to break it to you but if all drug addicts quit tomorrow, the brainpower freed up would get us zero percent closer to space travel.
Or to put it another way, why are there so many homeless encampments when businesses can't get enough minimally skilled workers to keep up with demand?
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Philosophy
You are wrong on every count.Wizard22 wrote: ↑July 29th, 2022, 3:40 amI disagree fundamentally.Sy Borg wrote: ↑July 26th, 2022, 9:06 pm Given that a minuscule proportion of people use "heroine needles" *, crack rocks and meth, you appear to be speaking to about 0.01% of the world's population. Will they see yourProtestant work ethic as The Ultimate Truth, or will they realise you are parrotting your preferred media organisations?
No, "we" are not building spaceships. "We" are not exploring deep space. And we certainly won't be getting anywhere near other solar systems.
A few companies and governmental space agencies are doing marvellous work in space, but those achievements are unrelated to us, and even more unrelated to drug use by young people rendered redundant by offshoring, outsourcing and automation.
* Heroine needles - when one aggravates brave female warriors?
Your defense of drug-addiction is noted. However, they do waste their lives. And they will admit that their lives are "Meaningless". That's their Admission, so you can debate with them why or how that is. But to most people, it's common sense. Hedonism is not enough, for a 'Meaningful' life. There's more to Life than this.
And on the next point, those who get in the way of true, genuine Human progress, will simply be stepped-over. Therefore, we WILL indeed build rocketships and spacecraft, we WILL explore the cosmos, we WILL colonize unknown solar systems.
Ask yourself, why are *you* so against this?? Is it because, by comparison, you fear that your life would come up short to such a Meaning or Purpose?
To start, I did not defend drug addiction but pointed out that those addicted to heroin, crack and meth are a tiny minority. Simply, your claim that I was defending drug addiction was a lie designed to denigrate me. I expect that on Facebook, but such misrepresentations have no place on philosophy forums.
Throughout history, addiction to dangerous drugs has been rife in almost all societies. Alcohol is perhaps the very most dangerous of common drugs, and its carcinogenic properties are only now starting to be understood. So, throughout history societies have been designed, lead and controlled by drug addicts, usually alcohol. Yet societies have still grown and developed enormously, and that includes space exploration. Many of the great philosophers were addicted to alcohol or cocaine. So, no, a tiny proportion of lost souls numbing their pain with narcotics is not destroying society. Overpopulation, overconsumption, inequality and lack of opportunity are eroding societies.
You are also wrong about space. If "we" are going into space, as you claim, please let me know the date that you personally take off. Have you booked a spot on Mars with Elon? It's a not "we". "They" - not "we" - as in a select few very, very rich people - are going into space (for short periods). "We", on the other hand, are not going anywhere.
Humans are not made for space, only capable of survive on a tiny sliver of a single planet's surface. The rest is off limits, aside from "bubbles" of habitability like the ISS.
Machines will explore various parts of the solar system, but humans are not made for space travel. The idea of sending humans to exoplanets is absurd, pure science fiction. Humans will almost certainly never settle on Mars or elsewhere, aside from (maybe) limited stays on Moon bases. Gravity. Radiation. Water. Toxins. Extreme heat and cold. Space is too hostile to life, but machines can handle the conditions. As they say, the Earth is all we have and there is no Planet B.
Science fiction has a lot to answer for, in raising unrealistic expectations about the future.
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: July 8th, 2022, 3:14 am
Re: Philosophy
You said that drug addicts would react to my position as propaganda, "parroting preferred media organizations", or that I am offering some "Ultimate Truth".Sy Borg wrote: ↑July 29th, 2022, 3:57 pmYou are wrong on every count.
To start, I did not defend drug addiction but pointed out that those addicted to heroin, crack and meth are a tiny minority. Simply, your claim that I was defending drug addiction was a lie designed to denigrate me. I expect that on Facebook, but such misrepresentations have no place on philosophy forums.
It's not *ME* who predominantly claims that a drug-abused and addicted life is meaningless. It's *THEM* who admit such. They've admitted it to me, throughout life. And it's a common sense position. It's a waste of life. They know it. That's why addicts will admit that they are 'Addicted'. That's what 'Addiction' is, and drug "abuse".
And so, many societies squander Meaning of Life, by extension from your own analysis.Sy Borg wrote: ↑July 29th, 2022, 3:57 pmThroughout history, addiction to dangerous drugs has been rife in almost all societies. Alcohol is perhaps the very most dangerous of common drugs, and its carcinogenic properties are only now starting to be understood. So, throughout history societies have been designed, lead and controlled by drug addicts, usually alcohol. Yet societies have still grown and developed enormously, and that includes space exploration. Many of the great philosophers were addicted to alcohol or cocaine. So, no, a tiny proportion of lost souls numbing their pain with narcotics is not destroying society. Overpopulation, overconsumption, inequality and lack of opportunity are eroding societies.
I think you underestimate the coming decades and centuries. However, admittedly, a lot of motivation and inspiration is required to strongly push the masses and upcoming generations, toward that end.Sy Borg wrote: ↑July 29th, 2022, 3:57 pmYou are also wrong about space. If "we" are going into space, as you claim, please let me know the date that you personally take off. Have you booked a spot on Mars with Elon? It's a not "we". "They" - not "we" - as in a select few very, very rich people - are going into space (for short periods). "We", on the other hand, are not going anywhere.
Humans are not made for space, only capable of survive on a tiny sliver of a single planet's surface. The rest is off limits, aside from "bubbles" of habitability like the ISS.
Machines will explore various parts of the solar system, but humans are not made for space travel. The idea of sending humans to exoplanets is absurd, pure science fiction. Humans will almost certainly never settle on Mars or elsewhere, aside from (maybe) limited stays on Moon bases. Gravity. Radiation. Water. Toxins. Extreme heat and cold. Space is too hostile to life, but machines can handle the conditions. As they say, the Earth is all we have and there is no Planet B.
Science fiction has a lot to answer for, in raising unrealistic expectations about the future.
This relates to Meaning of Life, because without such goals and ideals, as mentioned, societies and people tend to waste their lives on simple hedonistic pursuits. The masses need to be shaped, because without such leadership, they tend to waste Life completely. In this way, Meaning of Life comes from above, from the upper classes passed down to the middle and lower classes.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023