Purpose of Life

Discussion in 'About the Members' started by Hermann, Sep 14, 2005.

  1. water the sea Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,442
    Wes,



    Your reasoning in regards to the first principles is the same as that of theists.
    Only the names are a bit different.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Roman Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,560
    I think it's bleeding. I'm almost convinced life is for bleeding. I might have a son or two, just to make sure.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,844
    So theists concur that there is no way to know what first principles are as of yet? They would concur that there is no plan, but rather - an ongoing expression of something that hasn't yet been defined, but might be? Would you agree with either?

    Well, either way - they're both faith-based arguments. A key difference IMO, is a minimization of faith vs. the opposite.

    Is there a fundamental difference between a physics book and "holy scripture"?
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. water the sea Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,442
    The common theistic argument is that God works in mysterious ways. Which is in effect the same as you say above.


    What is the opposite of faith ...


    I don't think so. They are both usually printed on paper.
    There are differences in how some people approach them though.
     
  8. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,844
    That isn't an argument. It's a statement that I see as equivalent to "don't bother to think", whereas I've clearly endorsed the opposite.

    The opposite extreme of faith, not the opposite of faith. You can have just a wee little assumption that's irrefutable to self or pretty much anyone like for instance, "cogito ergo sum", or you can have a huge, unsupportable, arguably ridiculous one-step solution that doesn't answer any questions and results in things like "god works in mysterious ways" (a non-statement to those who refute your faith).

    IMO, self is irreducable.

    God is infinitely reducable.

    That's just my opinion. Reject it if you like.

    I was speaking to the content and its basis.
     
  9. water the sea Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,442
    Now consistently apply your understanding of observational distance, and you'll see you can't make any other but subjective statements about anything.

    And what is the subjective worth?
     
  10. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,844
    I'm glad you understand where I'm coming from then. Do you however, allow a psuedo-"shared understanding"?

    On a related note, I've been thinking about this and ponder if objective statements can be made via some sort of transform, that first accounts for subjectivity. It's probably a pipe dream but it sometimes seems promising.

    Whatever the subject renders it.
     
  11. Hermann Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    162
    Q,
    Many people see the world like a puzzle. They get a fixed picture from somewhere and recognize only such events (puzzle pieces) that fit to the prefixed picture. Others puzzle pieces (events) may fit well to other pictures, but these will be automatically ignored. Some atheists seem to be as biased as religious fanatics.
     
  12. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,125
    Hermann

    Talking in riddles does not answer the questions posed to you.

    Physicist, indeed. HA!
     
  13. Hermann Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    162
    Q,
    I did not expect, that this was a real question. But yes, I am physicist and got my Ph.D. degree in 1966. A detailed biography you will find on my website.
    What are you? Where did you get your arrogant behavior from?
     
  14. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,125
    I did not expect, that this was a real question.

    How many times do I need to ask before you realize its not a fake question?

    A detailed biography you will find on my website.

    Then it must be true, if its on a website.

    Where did you get your arrogant behavior from?

    From those who spout nonsense and don't answer questions.
     
  15. Gekkou Registered Member

    Messages:
    12
    This is giant point that I would like to make again and again in spite of the irony of wasting time doing so. It is fine to wonder about the most far reaching things every once in a while, but there are people who seem to love to endlessly debate things that are far beyond the ken of the highest of geniuses, especially when they make no effort scientifically to even approach a theory. - questions like 'what is the origin of the universe'. Does God exist? These worked over questions that are so non-answerable are such a pointless exercise. Why isn't everyone tired of even asking them yet?

    Ok, I'll cut us some slack. We're just jaw-jacking here (with a keyboard), but really, some people take this stuff very seriously. People much older than myself sometimes. What's that about?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. Hermann Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    162
    Q,
    I did ask you “What are you?” – this was a real question, but you did not answer.
     
  17. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,125
    I did ask you “What are you?” – this was a real question, but you did not answer.

    I see, I'm required to answer your questions, but you're immune to answering mine?
     
  18. Hermann Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    162
    Q,
    Which question did I not answer? I am willing to answer any reasonable question. Why are you not telling us what you are?
     
  19. water the sea Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,442
    Hermann,


    Could you say that if you knew the purpose of life, then you'd finally feel safe? But until then, you will feel insecure?
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2005
  20. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,125
    Hermann, you simply have to read the thread to know which questions you didn't answer.

    What I am? I am a person.
     
  21. devils_reject Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    659
    Purpose is opposite of freedom. As it is we are free. But that also means we are not fulfiling our purpose as much, which is a detriment to the system. Either the system has been overiden unconsiously or the system is now gently roasting our demise. The correct scenario is anyone's guess. There is always a system present where there is a sort of organizaton and that also applies to living things. For it is the system that has brough us this far.Whatever. One thing we can always count on is evolution, our time will surely come to a peak and the crest will roll back. I do believe all what we are insinuating about purpose is from the heart alone, as only someone else can tell you who you are.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2005
  22. comisaru Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    46
    Whenever we like or not, the humans are only one of the species living on earth. Every species has only one philosophy of life: to survive. All others philosophies came later and just try to answer to some fundamental questions upon the historical or social conditions.
    From my personal point of view, without any scientific argument, I think that life is just an accident, like a virus, that probably will alter the sublime masterpiece of the universe.
     
  23. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,844
    comisaru, that is silly.

    the universe itself is an accident in the context you put forth. life is the result of the universe seeking equilibrium no? meh. life is an integral part OF the sublime masterpiece of the universe. it cannot "alter it", as it IS it. To alter "it" is to alter "itself". life will do what it does, it is the mandate of the universe that it does so (as in ultimately, the continuing fruition of first principles, whatever they be (the rules of physics)).

    oh but you're mostly right about the survive thing. but it's not quite that simple. it's more accurately "perform its function" which is generally survival as the creature in question percieves it in the now.
     

Share This Page