Question on the meaning of Life

[Dostoyevsky]

@Hold_Fast

If anyone else has some different opinions on what the meaning of life is, be sure to lay it on me. Otherwise, lets bring on the rhetoric.

The presumed necessity of meaning is as flawed as the presumed necessity of causation. Case in point: what’s the meaning to/of God’s existence?

**Is is-ing. That’s the meaning. **

[Mangetout]

@lekatt

Have to disagree with the Psychopath label. There is intrinsic value in being good and doing good, I agree, but it is even more than that. What “God” instructs people to do, and how to act, changes from religion to religion. Not a very reliable source of morals. There is a law that governs the interaction of individuals: “You will reap whatsoever you sow.” If you treat people in a negative way you will be unhappy with yourself as well as the people you treat badly. But if you help others with no expectation of any reward you will, in fact, help yourself. The greater the good, the greater the reward.

I can’t even tell why you’re disagreeing with me. If you need someone else to define good and bad for you, it doesn’t mean you’re a faithful follower, it means you’re mentally ill.

[begbert2]

@lekatt

If that were the case, societies were never get any better. Never give up slavery, etc.

If attitudes were innate, then societies would never get any better. However good we can be, we’d already be to start with, and would never have had slavery, etc.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Hold_Fast

The only thing left to do is have fun, or find pleasure with the short time that we have. Being ‘nice’, is not pleasurable. So your contrdicting yourselves (those who have said this, which is most), that the general idea is too be nice and have fun. Serial Killers have fun in not being nice. In fact pretty much all of us will be able to find fun in way or another, in being not nice.

Say WHAT now? Are you serious, - you actually think that being “nice” is not pleasurable?

I (and I’m far from alone) find the greatest pleasures in life consist of being nice to others. I can assure you that I cannot think of any way that I would have fun that involved being not nice to someone.

As has been pointed out, serial killers do not have “fun”. They are in a living hell of psychosis, and are probably the most miserable people out there.

In summary, I’m pretty glad that you have a strong religion that tells you explicitly what you may and may not do, if you think that it would be “fun” to be mean to people. It’s possible that you may be the sort of person who needs a strong authoritarian outside source of morality that explicitly tells you what is wrong and right.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
So you’re saying that when we die, on our deathbed, we’ll receive total consciousness?

@zoid

So we got that goin’ for us, which is nice.

You guys are freakin’ awesome.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@lekatt

If that were the case, societies were never get any better. Never give up slavery, etc.

If morality was innate, societies wouldn’t have to get better - they’d start out perfect.

[DanBlather]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

If morality was innate, societies wouldn’t have to get better - they’d start out perfect.

Silly. Walking is innate (ever see the reflex when you lower a toddler’s legs onto a surface), but we stub out toes and fall down all the time. Sex is innate but some people can’t have orgasms. Eating is innate but we have anorexics.

[Buck_Godot]

@Czarcasm

Have you ever read All The Myriad Ways by Larry Niven?

No I haven’t, although I’ve read some of his other stuff. I’ll see if I can get a copy. From the synopsis I found, it seems to be about the multi-universe concept of quantum mechanics, another concept I have a fun time with. Are there any other details that relate to my post?

[Czarcasm]

@Buck_Godot

No I haven’t, although I’ve read some of his other stuff. I’ll see if I can get a copy. From the synopsis I found, it seems to be about the multi-universe concept of quantum mechanics, another concept I have a fun time with. Are there any other details that relate to my post?

It involves the meaning of life if everything was possible at the same time.

[Revenant_Threshold]

@Lemur866

The other thing that HoldFast and his ilk don’t seem to consider is that according to his logic all atheists should be serial killers. Yet we aren’t. But that never causes him to consider that perhaps he should check his premises.

To be fair, as I read HoldFast’s point, he doesn’t disbelieve those who claim alternative answers, but simply disagrees with them. That is, it could be that all we atheists think we have answers to the meaning of life (or otherwise); we’re actually wrong about them, but our unrealised ignorance stops us from being serial killing unpleasant types.

[wisernow]

From Webster’s

Meaning of life = "the period from birth to death ".

Now, if you had asked “what gives life a meaning?”, it would be what the others have been telling you.

[begbert2]

@DanBlather

Silly. Walking is innate (ever see the reflex when you lower a toddler’s legs onto a surface), but we stub out toes and fall down all the time. Sex is innate but some people can’t have orgasms. Eating is innate but we have anorexics.

We’re talking about morality being inherent in people, not societies. That means that whatever developing it does would have to happen over the course of individual lives, starting over with each new generation - not over the course of the hundreds of years that it seems to take civilizations to get up to speed.

Unless of course you’re positing reincarnation, which could theoretically cover it…somewhat anyway. (mixing disjoint philosophies is fun!) Though we’re still talking hundreds or thousands of years for individual ‘souls’ to develop their sophistication in social issues, which doesn’t sound all that innate to me.

@Euphonious_Polemic

In summary, I’m pretty glad that you have a strong religion that tells you explicitly what you may and may not do, if you think that it would be “fun” to be mean to people. It’s possible that you may be the sort of person who needs a strong authoritarian outside source of morality that explicitly tells you what is wrong and right.

They’d get better. I speak from experience: I was raised in a religious home - I was taught only religious ‘God said so’ morality by my well-meaning but deluded parents. When this teaching failed I was literally without a moral code, and nobody was teaching one. I went through the stages I mentioned above:

1. Paying attention to rules and punishments only. In my early teens I was a serous little bastard when I thought I could get away with it, up to and including stealing from my parents. (I correctly gauged that the consequences would not be proportional to the crimes.) About the only knowledge of value I took away from this is that any rule is actually a choice - obedience, or consequences, and you should be prepared for people to choose the consequences when you make a rule.

2. Noticing that being nice makes people be nice to you, for your benefit. This made me become a nice guy, even when it wasn’t required. I gradually became a human being worth the matter I’m printed on. So others could do it too.

3. Empathy. I’m working on it. I could be lots better.

[Mangetout]

Tigers eat meat

Tigers are also made of meat.

Baby tigers are probably more tender and juicy than adult ones.

As far as I can tell, tigers do pretty much whatever they like, without God or anyone else deciding right and wrong for them

And yet tigers don’t generally eat their own young.

Why not? What’s stopping them?

[Bryan_Ekers]

@Mangetout

And yet tigers don’t generally eat their own young.

Why not? What’s stopping them?

Well, they taste bad, what with heads made out of ruber and tails made out of spings.

[Acsenray]

The tigers with an eat-your-own-young gene weren’t able to produce offspring who lived long enough to produce thrir own offspring.

Besides, there are some animals that do eat their own young in certain circumstances.

[lekatt]

@Mangetout

I can’t even tell why you’re disagreeing with me. If you need someone else to define good and bad for you, it doesn’t mean you’re a faithful follower, it means you’re mentally ill.

You missed what I said.

[lekatt]

@Dostoyevsky

The presumed necessity of meaning is as flawed as the presumed necessity of causation. Case in point: what’s the meaning to/of God’s existence?

**Is is-ing. That’s the meaning. **

I think most cause and effect are apparent.

So me an effect without a cause? I don’t believe in accidents.

[zoid]

@Bryan_Ekers

Well, they taste bad, what with heads made out of ruber and tails made out of spings.

Plus there’s only the one, so…

[Kozmik]

@Mangetout

Tigers eat meat

Tigers are also made of meat.

Yet tigers do not eat themselves.

@lekatt

You missed what I said.

Get back to the tigers.

[Miller]

@wisernow

From Webster’s

Meaning of life = "the period from birth to death ".

Now, if you had asked “what gives life a meaning?”, it would be what the others have been telling you.

Webster’s, judging by your post.