Given that the greatest scholars and philosphers of all humanity have been discussing this question for thousands of years without a conclusion, I’m curious what (with respect to the SD’s 30 years’ history) you imagine you’re going to find out on this messageboard?
Are you asking me? I’m smarter than all those guys.
If you’re asking the OP, then I dunno; maybe he wanted to know what those philosophers came up with.
When I think of how people find meaning in their lives I look to 2 courageous people I know,both have MuscularDysthrophy. One is in her 50’s and married, has two healthy children now grown, 1 grandchild. She was married twice. Not once did I ever hear either of them complain that life sucked!
They both attended College, the one who is in her fifties is an inspiration to all who know her. The other is in her 20’s no matter what her situation she doesn’t complain, she has had 3 very serious operations to keep alive, the last one left her wheelchair bound,but is continueing her education, both have spent what life they have had hoping to do good for others. The older person is head of the handicapped division in California.She only (now) can only use a computer to do her work, she has only one finger she can use, she can speak, hear, see, and think. she is very intelligent. They both have found meaning to their lives,and their lives have been a help to others.
Our niece had two boys with MD who died in their twenties, both worked and lived productive lives even if they were short lived. To me they found life meaningful.
No one has quoted from ‘House’? “Nothing matters. We’re all just cockroaches, wildebeests dying on the riverbank. Life has no meaning.”
Thanks a heap, Greg 
- you made Sali even sadder and more depressed than she already is.
Awesome PERIOD
Dear Olivesmarch,
:smack:
You’ve severely misinterpreted what I said. But I see how you could have been thoroughly pissed off. I guess you equate criticism with mockery.
But I stand by my beliefs:
Your philosophy madam, is a wet stinking dog. I wouldn’t let it inside my home let alone allow it to dictate my life.
I’m just kidding!!! Don’t get mad!!! I’m being silly okay? :D:D:D:cool:Here’s what I really think:
Religion is the belief in and worship of a god or gods, or any such system of belief and worship, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs
You worship human suffering, and your devotion and ritual observance entails rationalizing existentialism. Moral Code devised from your god = to “transcend pain/pleasure” stereotype through this assign meaning fulfilment and purpose to your life.
All the aspects of religion including symbolic gibberish, is all there. I give life menaing. Meaning is at this moment blablalbalblalblal suffering is the meaning that gives meanning because it means alot and meaning is MEANING!!!
You sound a very much like a priest or preacher/guru. It’s like you’ve studied a philosophy and now you can teach the lessons it has to offer to the sheep. Keep in mind that this is purely an opinion.
Your philosophy, namely, existentialism, is a secular philosophy. This kind of thinking is based on reason, and logic. The logic is erroneous when you participate to assert some emotional value rather than reason. I never said there was anything wrong with being emotional and doing what you do. I just don’t see existentialism as what its proponents make it out to be. But let’s move on to your reaction…
As far as I can see, you agree with me that your thinking here is inherently irrational. But since you don’t want to be considered irrational you’re retort is that there is nothing wrong in being such. I can only assume that you wished, like many religious people would, that you could logically assert your beliefs. But this is impossible, as demonstrated repeatedly throughout the entirety of human history. Your response is very representative of the concept. You got angry and defensive and told me off super-duper sure of your own crap.
You believe in your thing? That’s fine. I don’t plainly care whether you worship Satan, Elvis or furniture.
However, rather than attempting to formulate evidence for you conclusions (which is impossible), any more discussion on the logic (of which there is none) behind your convictions should be left to the study of existentialism and done so not in the name of the pursuit of reason.
I’ve got to admit, it’s not like Scientology so I shouldn’t butcher it like I would that. However, if Scientology claims to be a religion and everyone agrees, then so is existentialism. Do the people involved have to call it a religion for it to be one? No, the entire world would have to change the definition of religion.
How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg?
If it is a form of coordinated self-help that was founded years ago by some central figures, a bunch of people today follow it and it’s doctrines, and they aim to practice that in their life, then let’s just assume a whole butt-load of peeps would consider it, by the definition, a religion. Instead of saying things like spirituality, you’ll say something like the essence of your being. Soul, moksha, heaven, nirvana, spirituality, etc… These are all just names we give to the things that make up beliefs.
If it barks like a dog, craps like a dog, looks like a dog…
it’s a friggin dog.
But here’s what really gave you away.
You lost all the reasoning behind your philosophy. (Actually, the stuff you read somewhere and repeated… back to everybody), is that you had nowhere else to go except to claim “I win because I’m OLDER”.
If you could be right by default, we’d be living in a really underdeveloped world. I’m sure your age makes your experiences more valuable. What a joke! If I share the same opinions as someone 50 years older than I and a hundred times more experienced on the suffering and pleasures of life does that give me seniority or maturity beyond my age? I DON’T THINK SO LADY!!!
Everything that you think has an opposition with equally reasonable backing.
This is my advice. And if you can’t take advice because of your convictions about age, then you don’t have to read it. Who’s making you?
If you manage to get past this though:
I sometimes wonder how I get to where I am. Most of the time when I’m certain of something, I try to remember what made me think about the idea in the first place.
For example, if I were certain that I’m a intelligent. I would try to think why would I need to assert this in my head. Did I think about it because it made me feel good? Did I think about it because somebody told me I’m smart? Did i think about it because I’m succeeding a lot at things that society would deem credit me with intelligence?
Who knows… I assume (and I strictly mean, assume) that we are victims of our own emotions in response to the experiences we remember, record whatever you want to call it.
In that case if I want to be rational, as much as possible and regardless of why, then I would try as hard as I can to avoid making conclusions that could be rooted in unsound theory, as much as I can.
I’m assuming you are attempting to be rational when you believe in existentialist philosophy. And I’m assuming that Christianity didn’t work out because it was too irrational to your definition of rationality.
I don’t know why we do what we do. No one does. Only people who haven’t yet seen the faults in their logic say these things. And believe me, anything that anyone said in response to my happy little question “Is there any real meaning to life?” has been thoroughly debated in higher intellectual circles than this one. It’s too simplistic to say pain vs pleasure, or internal morality, or assigning purpose to life.
These are all hypotheses to a question with no definitive, correct answer to be found. We cannot test these hypotheses, so solutions are irrelevant. No data can be collected. Nothing can be done about it. I’m happy to see so many people interested. It’s a topic I find very enticing and stimulating.
And on top of that. I salute you for being standing up for your beliefs. I can see how that is admirable. I don’t agree with how you did it. And I myself wouldn’t stand up for that. But isn’t strong conviction commendable?
I don’t know, maybe I’m just being indirect. 
Yes, I have the tendency to do that.
All righty, let’s get one thing out of the way first: I’m a Buddhist. The ‘‘transcending desire/aversion’’ thing comes from Buddhism, not existentialism.
That said, adhering to any particular philosophy does not render one religious by your definition. What renders one religious is the inability to recognize the difference between ‘‘a paradigm that works for one’s life’’ and ‘‘absolute universal truth.’’ I recognize the difference, always.
I would hope that it would be obvious that anything stated in this thread is purely opinion. I don’t give a flying fuck whatever people believe, as long as it works for them and doesn’t harm other people. Obviously I am going to speak in terms of what has worked for me. Part of the way I find meaning in my own life is helping others in whatever way I can to deal with their own stuff.
I strongly disagree with the notion that existentialism is based on reason and logic. Have you read existentialist literature? Have you studied Nietzsche? Does Nietzsche strike you as a logical and reasonable person?
Existentialism is very different from mainstream Western philosophy for exactly the reason that it so strikingly deviates from the rules of logic, reason and empiricism. When Nietzsche first presented The Birth of Tragedy to his peers they thought he was on crack. There’s nothing rational about it. It’s about finding the strength to live in a world where objective meaning is either non-existent or unknowable. It is the product of mentally ill people trying to come to terms with their own arbitrary suffering.
Meaning has nothing to do with logic. Meaning can never be solved with logic, nor can it be solved with empiricism. As wonderful as our scientific method is, it is decidedly lacking in the ‘‘meaning’’ department. There is no possible reasonable answer to ‘‘what is the meaning of life?’’ Your conclusion in this matter will depend upon how you perceive the world and what you think about it. Any statement on the meaning of life is by definition a statement of belief.
I don’t care whether I can logically assert my beliefs or not. That is where you seem to be missing the point. Existentialism is not about the logical assertion of anything. It is about creating meaning in a life that seems meaningless.
I’m not super-duper sure of anything, ever.
I am so confused. Where do you think I was attempting to formulate evidence of anything? I was just answering the damned question–’‘I don’t think life has any objective meaning but this is the meaning I have created for my life.’’
Religion has a pretty standard and universally accepted definition. If you’re going to posit a new definition, you’d be wise to have a pretty convincing argument for why that should be the case.
Yes, unlike many people on the Dope, I actually credit my ideas. This is another thing that irks me about this exchange–you keep implying that you find this unoriginal thinking so tiresome, when in fact there’s really nothing anyone can say on this topic that hasn’t already been said.
Listen, there’s a lot about your initial response that pissed me off. Not only were you essentially stating your opinion as fact about my experiences, you were patronizing as hell about it. I really don’t care what age you are. I just got a ‘‘ever-so-more-englightened than you plebians there on the ground’’ vibe and if there’s one thing that really pushes my buttons, it’s condescension–especially after I poured my heart out like that.
Dude, this is so painful. I AGREE WITH YOU. I am about the least dogmatic person you will ever meet, I promise.
And it is wise of you to reach this conclusion. Rationality is a wonderful tool. It can’t, unfortunately, solve the problem of suffering.
It had less to do with rationality and more to do with trying to come to terms with my own suffering. As I’ve mentioned before, the thing I have wrestled with my entire life is coming to terms with the reality of suffering. That is where I think you’re missing the entire point of existentialism. Do you think a person who is drowning gives a shit what is ‘‘objectively true’’? No, they just need a damn life raft.
Is it true that suffering is inevitable, everything is impermanent, we are all interconnected, and meditation helps us achieve mental clarity? Maybe, maybe not. But it is true that therapeutic techniques using those principles have been proven in numerous randomized controlled trials to help people with severe mental illness.
Which is really more important?
Agreed, agreed.
If solutions are irrelevant, then why did you start this thread?
This is where you and I differ – you believe that just because a hypothesis can’t be tested means it isn’t worth examining. While certainly no controlled experiments can be done to test the meaning of life, can’t we do a little experiment of one? We can’t generalize the results by any means, but we can say, ‘‘Hey, this works for me.’’ And we can have a measurable positive outcome which reinforces the theory as it applies to said experimental subject.
Because when it all boils down to it, it doesn’t matter what your Meaning is. All that matters is that your Meaning helps you deal with life, improves your quality of life, or makes you happy based on your own personal definition of ‘happiness.’
I get that you find philosophy an interesting intellectual exercise. I feel very differently about philosophy. I live and breathe it, I practice it, I test it on myself, I use it to improve the quality of my life. I can’t imagine thinking about it in any other way. It has a very different meaning to me, apparently, than it does to you. That’s okay. But when we’re not mindful of the difference, it’s easy to get wires crossed.
If there’s one thing I’m confident about, it’s my own experiences and my own feelings about them. In that, I agree, I have very strong convictions. You can’t tell me that existentialism didn’t liberate me in that moment because you weren’t there and you don’t know how intellectually crippled I was before I found it. And you don’t even know my definition of ‘‘freedom,’’ for that matter – so how can you know whether I experienced it or not?
There is a difference between ‘‘I found this particularly liberating’’ and ‘‘Everyone should find this particularly liberating.’’ I was asserting the former, which is my subjective experience, rather than the latter.
Huh.
I’ve spent the last two days trying to parse this statement:
I think I finally figured it out: Meaning doesn’t exist.
It’s amazing how missing one little sentence can so totally throw your understanding of a person’s position.
So that’s basically the crux of your argument. That makes the rest of the things you said a little more clear, because I honestly had no idea what you were trying to argue. Though going back through my initial response to you, I don’t think I come across as angry or defensive at all, so I’m not sure why you reacted as strongly as you did. Just so there’s no confusion again – I am not in any way feeling angry or defensive as I state the following…
I’d be interested to hear specifically what you think is so deficient about existentialism, because you’ve made a number of statements about it that strike me as factually incorrect.
I don’t really believe it’s possible to divorce any given philosophy from its historical context or from the people who created it. I don’t believe even the great formal Western philosophers were driven by ‘‘logic and reason’’ – that may have been their medium of communication, but I believe that they, too, were driven by the human desire to make sense of this bizarre existence we have.
One reason I love Nietzsche in particular is that he called philosophy out on its shit. He dispensed almost immediately with the notion that philosophy is about logic and reason, because to him philosophy was a visceral, dynamic, emotional thing and he wasn’t ashamed of that. I don’t know how much formal philosophy you have studied, but it seemed to me while surveying 17th and 18th century philosophy that these arguments of Locke, Hume, Kant and so-forth, were emotionally and in some cases spiritually driven, hidden behind the guise of ‘‘logic’’ or ‘‘empiricism.’’ As if you can logically prove the existence of God! What do you think motivated Descarte’s ontological argument for the existence of God? Do you really think it was logic?
This is generally why I decided not to major in philosophy – because people seemed genuinely incapable of confessing that they were just pulling shit out of their ass to try to make sense of the world. People take themselves, and their ideas, way too seriously in that field (this is a generalization, mind you.)
So you believe that meaning doesn’t exist. Do you consider yourself a nihilist? Best as I understand it, existentialism was constructed as a response to nihilism, saying, in essence, ‘‘Okay, sure, life may be objectively meaningless, but so what? It’s all a crapshoot but if we’re going to find the will to carry on we might as well come up with some reason to live.’’ I’m not sure what you find so abhorrent about that, but by definition it can’t be a dogma. It presupposes nothing except the absence of objective meaning, which I don’t think is a particularly irrational or dogmatic belief. I don’t even know what claims existentialists make about themselves that you think are so unconvincing. I honestly have no idea what you think existentialists believe. It’s not like I’m part of an organized movement or anything. There are no Ten Commandments of Existentialism.
And if I could sum up the extent of this ‘‘doctrine’’ I live by, it’s exactly that I may as well go ahead and make up a reason to live, because I’m terribly unhappy without meaning in my life. For some reason you find this incredibly vague idea ridiculous and religious, but I can’t fathom why. And I can’t fathom why my belief is so much more offensive than the 20 people before me who said the exact same thing.
I am also genuinely curious how you cope with life without assigning any meaning to it. It sounds like a terribly depressing existence.
No one is depressed. I just gave up on believing in things that somebody else came up with.
In fact we don’t fundamentally disagree. In fact, your last post I don’t really have any discord with.
I stand by the notion that settling for any philosophy is accepting that which you rejected when breaking away from religion. And I agree with trying to discern the way of things in the world. I think it’s beneficial to whatever it is that you do while your alive.
It’s wrong to accept. It is not Human to accept anything. We constantly change and constantly dissent with others and even ourselves. That’s just how it is. . you don’t “accept” religion or “accept” answers to life, you “SETTLE” for those things.Acceptance is something that happens at death and many people don’t even get to reach that point. How many people die having the time to really consider what is happening you know?
If anythign is possible its that every human is capable of being many different things at once, and never categorized as just one thing. People like to portray themselves a certain way. But we’re all selfish, selfless, empathetic, and aback. We all hate and love and cry and care, and loathe, and feel in general.
You can’t identify the one encompassing reason for life. We live because our life has a beginning, and we do things while we live because it has an end. That’s not a reason but that’s what it is. You can only state what is, not what could be. You’re just guessing
There is no good reason to assign meaning to life, because it serves no purpose. It’s feeding your own misconception that, you MUST have meaning. You don’t HAVE to anything.
That’s why its so easy for nihilists to see no objective reason for anything. Because you simply don’t HAVE to. And nihilism arises when you need not provide for you basic needs.
Existentialism happens to those that think they need to have a purpose else they will be depressed.
I HIGHLY suggest watching this video. It’s something that really surprised me and made my jaw drop and I really am never surprised by a person’s outlook on life. And I appreciate it because there is no reason to feel sympathy because of how developed and how intensely ahead he is of you and your convictions (by you i mean whoever views this video), and thus no urge to patronize this person.
The idea that our lives having a (short) maximum length, is what motivates us to do things (which I think you’re getting at there) is just one of those things that people say. It’s supposed to make us feel better: that somehow the status quo is optimal, if not perfect.
But in reality, children can’t really imagine growing old and dying (I know I felt immortal as a child), yet it doesn’t stop them learning, exploring, doing.
As adults, we start to appreciate our mortality, and think about pensions and legacies and so on, but only a fraction of the time. Most of the time, we just get on with it.
you’re right. But life is short, and constantly changing from the moment we are born to the moment we die.
maybe at first we are selfish desiring pain/pleasure creatures. In fact the psychological development of a human being can be fairly easily mapped out. Children are kind of the result of their environment. As adults we tend to not believe that.
The point is, many adults fall into this philosophical trap. And i don’t think there is any reason to. Maybe it’s part of growing up. I aim to handle this earlier along the way.
Again, I suggest watching the video.
And OLIVESMARCH… the anger I interpreted came from the fucks , i dont’ give a flying fucks, and referring to me as kid like your philosophy will one day shine upon my ignorant mind
I don’t think so lady
Maybe it’s just me, but I have a feeling that if those words were uttered by an attractive, healthy-looking person, they would just sound like New-Agey babbling.
HAHAHAH!!! EXACTLY!!!
But you never believe attractice looking people are facing mortality. So the credibility goes down the toilet,
In fact being attractive can often make you look dubious and silly when you say anything.
Part of it is because its sometimes true. Attractive people tend to involve themselves with appearances more than unnatractive people.
On the other hand, that is a stereotype and is not true 100%. Maybe 50%, or maybe more or maybe less. Regardless.
You’re right. We all stereotype whetehr we want to or not
But that’s good advertising no?
Put up somebody who looks credible when talking about something pertinent to their look.
Either way I agree with his philosophy. For the most part because I feel that thats how i think
People that may not be very happy. If you can’t find the purpose and meaning of life, then it would be better to “make-up” a happy ending. It is still better to light one candle than to curse the darkness. Be happy, satisfied, and grateful for the life you have, it will go faster and be better.
You mean like nihilism?
With all due respect, how do you know what I need to be happy?
It’s been clinically documented that people who suffer trauma and personal crisis fare better mental-health wise when they can attach some meaning to what happened to them. Again, how do you know what I need to be happy?
‘‘Tell me who you are, what fills you in every moment. Why do you like what you like? Why do you feel certain things as beautiful or not?’’
To me this seems like a very meaning-latent statement. Not to mention this person’s ‘‘7 Principles’’ – how is this not dogma by your own definition? This person doesn’t strike me as a nihilist at all. S/he strikes me as a person who has created meaning to the best of his/her ability based on personal life experience. Some of it sounds like Buddhism, but the rest, as ivan indicated, sounds like New-Agey crap.
You seem to feel that that we, the ignorant masses, have never before been exposed to nihilism and really just need to have our eyes opened. The reality is I’m sure many of us are familiar with nihilism. Many of us have been exposed to this and rejected it as unsatisfactory… in fact I was rather nihilistic when I first encountered existentialism. While nihilism may be a more advanced state of being for you, for me it would be a step backward. Been there, done that, didn’t care for it, moving on.
First of all, I’m a casual swearer. Doesn’t mean I’m mad.
Second of all, you are the one with that ‘‘one day your philosophy will shine upon my ignorant mind,’’ attitude, not me. You’ve stated several times that your perspective is more advanced than the ‘‘common’’ perspective that others have offered, when in fact this is merely your subjective opinion. As stated before, I don’t care what other people decide about their lives. It’s this notion that there is a superior way to decide, and that it’s knowable, that is so ridiculous.
I called you a kid because you demonstrate some very naive attitudes I associate with the impetuousness of youth. You clearly believe your views are superior and you have some insight that the rest of us lack. You have indicated several times that you believe nihilism is something you came up with all on your own and therefore that your ideas are vastly more original than ours. Finally, you have implied that you are further along in your understanding of the rest of us, and if we would just think things through more rationally, we would agree with you. This is a very juvenile attitude to have. I would feel that way whether you were 15 or 50.
Really, muody, I just need to let this go. It’s obvious we don’t even disagree that much. You have some interesting ideas, I just wish you were a little more willing to acknowledge that they are subjective to your personal experience and not indicative of some higher philosophical process. Maybe you will consider, as you move forward in life, that what works for you may not work for everyone else, and that it’s good enough just to say it works for you. Either way, I really don’t want to argue any more. I’m a lover, not a fighter.
This makes the common presumption that meaning and what makes you happy are the same. That if someone says they don’t think life has meaning they must be unhappy.
I think “Why am I here?”, “What should I do with my life?” and “What makes me happy?” are three separate questions, though there is a little overlap between the last two.
And, if the truth is unpleasant, it is nonetheless in my nature to recognise it. I couldn’t delude myself that it’s not true even if I wanted to.