Life is meaningless - Page 2

self biased · February 12, 2004, 05:43

own goal.

Agathon · February 12, 2004, 05:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Flip McWho
Yeah thats in your opinion though. Others believe that there is something there. Hell some people probably believe that there are unicorns out there somewhere.

People can believe what the hell they like, but it doesn't make it so. Despite all our best attempts we have yet to locate or detect a soul or come up with any decent account of how it is supposed to interact with a body.

And what does everyone think of people who believe in unicorns? Why not apply the same standard across the board? I don't see any reason why we should be tolerant of people who want us to believe in entities that there is no evidence for, and want to sanctimoniously meddle in other people's lives because of it.

Anyway, you can always cheat. It costs you nothing to have a Mr Mister album played at your funeral for brownie points if the Man does happen to exist.

Drogue · February 12, 2004, 05:47

Quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22
And that my friend is exactly the meaning of life

No, if the meaning of life is simply life itself, then it has no meaning.

If the meaning of the word "numocom" is defined simply as "numocom", then that word is meaningless. Something that can only be defined as itself has meaning.

The Mad Monk · February 12, 2004, 05:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Agathon

Really, I don't see vast gilded monuments to philosophy everywhere.

However, some nutcase Hebrew Carpenter gets himself nailed to a tree for short changing the Romans on a building job, and that's as a sign to spend millions upon millions on phallic shaped buildings and squillions more on wars to "convince" the rest of humanity that he wasn't really a carpenter, but a being sent from another world.

Kinda puts the money wasting philosophers into perspective, don't it?

If that's what you call an argument, it certainly does.

Bereta_Eder · February 12, 2004, 05:49

I was talking about seeing life's meaning as living it not what you meant by it as the perpetuation of the species.

Flip McWho · February 12, 2004, 05:55

Quote:

People can believe what the hell they like, but it doesn't make it so.

Fully agree.

Quote:

be tolerant of people who want us to believe in entities that there is no evidence for,

Because of the Bible man. Didn't you hear it was the word of God.

Quote:

Anyway, you can always cheat. It costs you nothing to have a Mr Mister album played at your funeral for brownie points if the Man does happen to exist

Yeah who was that guy who said that believing in God is a good gamble. If he doesn't exist you don't gain anything in being right about it, but if he does exist you can stand to win big by beleiving. I think it was Rowe wasn't it? Not 100% sure. I'm agnostic for now. Anyway God is supposed to be forgiving so he can forgive us our ignorance in not believing.

Drogue · February 12, 2004, 06:02

Quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22
I was talking about seeing life's meaning as living it not what you meant by it as the perpetuation of the species.

I mean about it's meaning being living too. Perpetuation of the species is simply to mean that more people can live it. But still it is meaningless, since if the only point in life is living it, then it is self-defining. You would have to ask what is the point in living it? To which there is none. So if the only meaning of life is to live it, then living it is still meaningless.

Agathon · February 12, 2004, 06:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Flip McWho

Because of the Bible man. Didn't you hear it was the word of God.

Have you heard the one that God exists because the Bible says so, and the Bible is true because God says so.

Quote:

Yeah who was that guy who said that believing in God is a good gamble. If he doesn't exist you don't gain anything in being right about it, but if he does exist you can stand to win big by beleiving. I think it was Rowe wasn't it? Not 100% sure. I'm agnostic for now. Anyway God is supposed to be forgiving so he can forgive us our ignorance in not believing.

Pascal. Unfortunately his argument is invalid.

monkspider · February 12, 2004, 06:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher

Indeed. For example, it is your destinty to produce feces-flavored popcorn into movie theatres worldwide. It is your purpose.

Indeed, and it is your destiny to have sex with said popcorn.

Ben Kenobi · February 12, 2004, 06:04

Quote:

Same as happens with "Save the Unicorns" campaigns.

So they are rather hard on horns, eh?

Ben Kenobi · February 12, 2004, 06:05

If life only has meaning because we give it meaning, how can we console someone who is suicidal? Clearly, for him, his life has no meaning, and we ought to encourage him to off himself.

Drogue · February 12, 2004, 06:06

Going by Pascal's argument was that the possibility of infinite rewards has a higher expectation than any earthly gain from not beliving, so if God cannot be proven not to exist, it is rational to believe, IIRC?

If so the best defence I can see is that by those reasoning, believing in all deities is rational, since it could be any of them. Even if your neighbour invents one, they could hav stumbled on the right one. However you cannot belong to two faiths at once like that.

Agathon · February 12, 2004, 06:07

Quote:

Originally posted by monkspider

Indeed, and it is your destiny to have sex with said popcorn.

Alll you'd need to make said popcorn is for Asher to breathe on it.

Bereta_Eder · February 12, 2004, 06:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Drogue

I mean about it's meaning being living too. Perpetuation of the species is simply to mean that more people can live it. But still it is meaningless, since if the only point in life is living it, then it is self-defining. You would have to ask what is the point in living it? To which there is none. So if the only meaning of life is to live it, then living it is still meaningless.

I understand what you say but maybe you didn't understand what I said? Or the way I said it. It wasn't so much a philosophical statement as it was a stance of... life

Drogue · February 12, 2004, 06:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
If life only has meaning because we give it meaning, how can we console someone who is suicidal? Clearly, for him, his life has no meaning, and we ought to encourage him to off himself.

Because their life may improve, indeed, almost certainly will, and so they would enjoy it more if they didn't commit suicide. However if it will never improve, such as someone dying slowly of cancer, or someone in a persistant vegetative state, or someone with any painful and terminal condition, then suicide/euthanasia may be a good option.

Given that life has no meaning, it would simply be a question of whether they and the world are better of with them living or dying. You can console someone by showing them how their life could change, how they affect people around them, who would miss them, how they can be happy, and make others happy.

If there is never a chance for them to enjoy life more than nothingness, then maybe suicide is an option, since it would be purely putting them out of their misery. That is why I support euthanasia. When someones life is completely hopeless, when they know they will never recover from the pain they are under, it should be an option for them.

However a lack of meaning in life does not mean that loss of life is fine, because without a meaning in life, enjoyment becomes paramount, IMHO. Loss of life almost always involves a loss of enjoyment, since life is usually better than nothingness, especially if you consider the effects suicide would have on the people close to that person.

Flip McWho · February 12, 2004, 06:13

Quote:

Have you heard the one that God exists because the Bible says so, and the Bible is true because God says so.

Yeah nice circular argument that they have there isn't it.

Drogue: I think thats why its invalid. My memory on this subject is a bit iffy aswell.

Quote:

If life only has meaning because we give it meaning, how can we console someone who is suicidal? Clearly, for him, his life has no meaning, and we ought to encourage him to off himself.

Tell him/her it's better than the alternative. Otherwise there ain't much really. Talk them through there problems and try to give find them something that is worth living for. Life has no meaning besides what you give to it. Just gotta accept it or die trying.

Flip McWho · February 12, 2004, 06:14

Drogue said it better.

Drogue · February 12, 2004, 06:15

Quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22
I understand what you say but maybe you didn't understand what I said? Or the way I said it. It wasn't so much a philosophical statement as it was a stance of... life

I think I did, though I'm not sure. I can understand it's a statement of life, I would see it the same. I think that life has no purpose/meaning/point, so enjoying it becomes the issue, and helping others enjoy it. However I wouldn't call that a meaning personally, which was why I countered it. But in essence, I agree with your statement

Bereta_Eder · February 12, 2004, 06:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Drogue

I think I did, though I'm not sure. I can understand it's a statement of life, I would see it the same. I think that life has no purpose/meaning/point, so enjoying it becomes the issue, and helping others enjoy it. However I wouldn't call that a meaning personally, which was why I countered it. But in essence, I agree with your statement

Yes that's it more or less

Although I wouldn't narrow it down so much on the hedonistic and chasing enjoyment but simply living it. With the good and the bad. Not withdrawing. And yep it wasn't meant to have a rationality basis in which to determine "meaning" it was more on the... "metaphysical"/faith side

curtsibling · February 12, 2004, 06:21

On topic:

Your live must be given meaning, by having a focus.

Flip McWho · February 12, 2004, 06:29

You don't necessarily need a focus to life. At the current moment I'm just meanderring through life without any clear focus at the moment. I'm just cruising. I still don't think my life is currently meaningless.

Ben Kenobi · February 12, 2004, 06:31

Quote:

Because their life may improve, indeed, almost certainly will, and so they would enjoy it more if they didn't commit suicide.

But this denies the presupposition that we define what meaning we have in our lives. You are importing external criteria in order to give life meaning.

Quote:

However if it will never improve, such as someone dying slowly of cancer, or someone in a persistant vegetative state, or someone with any painful and terminal condition, then suicide/euthanasia may be a good option.

But who decides which lives have worth and value, and which lives do not? The fundamental problem with the quality of life ethic is to deal with the conundrum. Either you decide for the person, whether their life has meaning, which is problematic because we may kill someone against their will, or you cannot rescue a person desiring suicide. You need an entire different perception of life.

Quote:

You can console someone by showing them how their life could change, how they affect people around them, who would miss them, how they can be happy, and make others happy.

Again, to them, these have no meaning, therefore they want to kill themselves, and would be perfectly justified in doing so.

Quote:

That is why I support euthanasia. When someones life is completely hopeless, when they know they will never recover from the pain they are under, it should be an option for them.

So who decides what counts as hopeless, and what does not? Why should we accept your perceptions over those of the actual person?

Quote:

since life is usually better than nothingness, especially if you consider the effects suicide would have on the people close to that person.

Okay. Problem here. Usually better than nothingness is not going to bring the incumbent suicide off the bridge. You need a totally different approach.

Drogue · February 12, 2004, 06:33

Quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22
Yes that's it more or less

Although I wouldn't narrow it down so much on the hedonistic and chasing enjoyment but simply living it. With the good and the bad. Not withdrawing. And yep it wasn't meant to have a rationality basis in which to determine "meaning" it was more on the... "metaphysical"/faith side

I don't see it as hedonistic, although I guess it is. But what else is there? If there is no purpose in life, then surely we are free to enjoy it. If there is no reason for us to be here, surely making the most of it, being happy, is all that matters? Some may argue happiness for themselves, some for all people, but I cannot see what other possible reason there could be. What do you mean by the "metaphysical" side? If you mean some form of soul, then I would have to contend that I don't believe it to exist.

curtsibling · February 12, 2004, 06:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Flip McWho
You don't necessarily need a focus to life. At the current moment I'm just meanderring through life without any clear focus at the moment. I'm just cruising. I still don't think my life is currently meaningless.

Well, it depends what your life-goal is, really.

Flip McWho · February 12, 2004, 06:40

Well I don't really have that much in a life long goal. I'm happy enough to see where life takes me. For now, this could change at some later point.

Urban Ranger · February 12, 2004, 06:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Agathon
It actually is, Shi; you only think it isn't because you believe in fairies.

Life is intrinsicly meaningless. However, it does not mean you cannot find a meaning for it.

Drogue · February 12, 2004, 06:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
But this denies the presupposition that we define what meaning we have in our lives. You are importing external criteria in order to give life meaning.

No, I am presuming that someone who is suicidal has defined their life as being worth less than nothingness. You can console them by showing them that that won't always be the case. if your life is less desirable than nothingness at the moment, suicide may look attractive. However unless it will always be less desirable than nothingness, then as Ming said in a suicide thread before "a perminant solution to a temporary problem". You have to show that person that their problems are temporary, and that they will feel that life is worth more than nothingness later in life.

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
But who decides which lives have worth and value, and which lives do not? The fundamental problem with the quality of life ethic is to deal with the conundrum. Either you decide for the person, whether their life has meaning, which is problematic because we may kill someone against their will, or you cannot rescue a person desiring suicide. You need an entire different perception of life.

The person decides. You can try to council someone, talk them out of suicide, but ultimately it is their decision. The only exception I can think of being that if they had a known mental condition that meant they could not rationally look at their life and make that decision for themselves. However I would see a decision to live or die should follow the same rules as a decision to sign a contract, that they must be of sound mind and body. If someone has a known disorder, then they cannot rationally decide whether they wish ti live or die. If someone can rationally see their options, then it is up to them which they choose.

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Again, to them, these have no meaning, therefore they want to kill themselves, and would be perfectly justified in doing so.

They have no meaning, but they in the objective sense, but they have a desire to live or die. If they are able to rationally choose, and decide to choose to die, then they are perfectly justified in doing so. The choice to live or die is theirs, but they can be consoled, talked to, helped and shown that life will improve, so they will choose to live. If they cannot think rationally about it, then they are not in a fit state to decide their own future.

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
So who decides what counts as hopeless, and what does not? Why should we accept your perceptions over those of the actual person?

I'm not offering my perceptions. If they have an incurable disease, and they wish to die to end their suffering, then to force them to live is, IMHO, inhumane. It is their decisions. They decide whether it is hopeless (based on what their doctor says) and they decide their fate.

IMHO, anyone who is of sound mind should be allowed to decide whether they wish to live or die. There are procedures in place to decide if they are of sound mind, such as a psychiatric report, a doctor examining them, etc.

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Okay. Problem here. Usually better than nothingness is not going to bring the incumbent suicide off the bridge. You need a totally different approach.

Your opinion. Showing someone that life is worth living is the only way to save someone from suicide, IMHO.

Urban Ranger · February 12, 2004, 06:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Drogue
If there is no purpose in life, then surely we are free to enjoy it.

But there is.

To sow your oats far and wide

Bereta_Eder · February 12, 2004, 06:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Drogue

I don't see it as hedonistic, although I guess it is. But what else is there? If there is no purpose in life, then surely we are free to enjoy it. If there is no reason for us to be here, surely making the most of it, being happy, is all that matters? Some may argue happiness for themselves, some for all people, but I cannot see what other possible reason there could be. What do you mean by the "metaphysical" side? If you mean some form of soul, then I would have to contend that I don't believe it to exist.

No nothing having to do with "soul". It was a play of words. In Greek "metaphysical" means something that transcends the physical (=nature, law, science) and hence rationality laws. So I just joked with that since what I said was a "stance of life" not a rationality principle.

About the hedonistic, I think of the whole issue more like it's just "life for life" kind of thing. You are living it and that's what's important. Good or bad may come and go come again etc. But the fact that you're living it becomes the most important part in contrast with not living it, withdrawing. Actually solely hedonism pursuit could lead one to not actually "live life" since life can be seen as more to "simply acquiring pleasures". But this is again something of a stance of life.

One has of course to define hedonism. It can be being fed grapes from gorgeous women while lying on a marble bench or it can mean dying in a war for one's country. However I think the meaning of hedonism is only the pursuit of "pleasures" that are more on the physical/material and not the intellectual/spititual/cognitive side.

Drogue · February 12, 2004, 06:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
But there is.

To sow your oats far and wide

I have answered that earlier. If the purpose of life is to create more life, then the purpose of life is still simply life itself. That is not a meaning, that is just a biological reaction to keep the species going. Since it is pleasurable to sow your oats, and it creates potential happiness in terms of other people, it caries on because of that.