<!--QuoteBegin-john_sheu+Apr 9 2004, 04:03 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (john_sheu @ Apr 9 2004, 04:03 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> What higher purpose? And why won't entropy win out? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Any one you choose. Everything wil not become meaningless, having fun no longer becomes the soul purpose of life. What are you going to do about it?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If I'm not alive, I can't have fun, and dying is probably painful, ok? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why would dying be painful? Birth isn't. (At least, not for the baby.)
legion, just curious but where did the people mentioning they don't believe in a point say they had no will to live? The vast majority of people enjoy living, they're by no means eager to embrace death, and in most cases will go out of their way to avoid it.
You could sit in your chair all day but that's not terribly exciting, you'd be better going and doing stuff like creating things to make both your own and others lives more enjoyable or seek some adventure. I don't know about things zeroing out either... after all one man invents CD and off the back of that we come to DVD technology. Whether the man who invented it is alive or not isn't really of much consequence anymore but the technology is because it lets us watch movies. This isn't a purpose that will fight evil, get you to heaven or really has any majorly epic, grandoise effect that would make invention or creation or living some amazing thing; but heck it makes life more interesting and convienent =3
I fail to see the point in arguing either, as legion points out, however for me it's to do with the fact that many people who turn to religion can't grasp life without a goal. If they could perhaps they wouldn't be religious (perhaps they would? I've yet to meet someone who fufils both... it seems rather exclusively; one or the other). I do see the ideals of living life with a point, and while it suits for some <u>I think</u> it's the wrong route to take. It's not a hard and fast fact, merely my own opinion after what I deemed to be properly weighing the sides.
Like most arguements surrounding such philosphical questions there's no way to 100% answer this stuff; you merely need to find the solution that sits best with you and have tolerance for others who disagree... not that I can talk on the patience part too well but at least I try =D
Just keep in mind that if you can't understand the view of those you argue against it's not going to be worth the while. While philosphocial arguements are often like two stubborn blind people debating the colour of an object, if you know the mindset of your opposition you can at least imagine why they've come to their position and perhaps then have a discussion that might go somewhere =/
Throwing misplaced remarks like 'people with no will to live' just displays a lack of knowledge of the subject at hand, or perhaps even a refusal to understand -.- To be honest, it's almost downright insulting. It'd be akin to a non-believer saying you're someone who lives their life around a children's fairytale. Not true by any sense of understanding nor particularly constructive to the arguement but people deem it necessary to get wound up and throw in such nonsense all the same huh? I know I find myself flying off the handle at some of the posts in here but perhaps it'd serve us all a little better to remember this is the 'discussion' forum not the 'make purposefully ignorant remarks designed to get a rise' forum. At least not when I last checked =o
<!--QuoteBegin-Z.X. Bogglesteinsky+Apr 9 2004, 05:41 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Z.X. Bogglesteinsky @ Apr 9 2004, 05:41 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If I'm not alive, I can't have fun, and dying is probably painful, ok? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Why would dying be painful? Birth isn't. (At least, not for the baby.) <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Birthing is very painful. Why do you think infants scream? It's because of the light hurting after having lived in darkness, and from the air forcing its way into the previously unused lungs(unused apart from the development of them). And, since getting stabbed or shot hurts a bunch, I'm pretty sure dying by either also hurts.
<!--QuoteBegin-Z.X. Bogglesteinsky+Apr 9 2004, 11:41 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Z.X. Bogglesteinsky @ Apr 9 2004, 11:41 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Why would dying be painful? Birth isn't. (At least, not for the baby.) <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> We can't know that birth isn't painful for the baby. Pulled from a place of warm safety into a cold, cruel world? And, we know that birth is painful for the mother. I would say that dying certainly would (or at least could) be painful. A violent death, or a death by certain natural causes (heart attack, virulent disease) could be quite excruciating.
<!--QuoteBegin-Trevelyan+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Trevelyan)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->atheists and... Humanism (are they the same thing? sure seems like it)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> They're different, they just seem like the same thing to you because they have the same basic premise: the lack of existence of a god or gods. I could claim that christianity and judaism are the same because they have the same basic premise, and many similar histories and principles, but I think we all agree that I would certainly be wrong.
<!--QuoteBegin-RaVe+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (RaVe)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->In order for something to truly exist, they must serve a purpose. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I disagree. Take a grain of sand in a desert. It serves no purpose. It does nothing. Without it, that desert would be the same, just with one less grain of sand. Yet, it exists. It's there, and we could go and take it, examine it, should we feel compelled to do so. I bet your response to this statement would be that I'm taking it too literally, that you meant a deeper significance; e.g. the difference between being alive and really living. If that's the case, I still disagree. Serving a particular purpose is a consequence of our choices. You don't have to serve a purpose.
This brings me to my main point, which has been touched on by others in passing, but largely overlooked by the thread. There has been some heated discussion here (particularly between the devout and non-religious types) about the purpose, meaning, or value of life, but as far as I can tell (and I think it's a safe assumption to make) no one's mind has been changed. And nor will anyone's mind be changed. And here's why. The purpose of existing is what ever you decide it is. The intrinsic value of life is a non-existent quality. A person, a mountain, every single thing that does or doesn't exist, none of them have any value by themselves. They only have the value that you give them. Life has no purpose until you decide on a purpose to apply to yourself. Descartes' notion of "I think, therefore I am" is a representation of a broader ideal: "It has purpose, meaning, or value because I give it that." One choice of purpose is as valid as any other. Existence isn't about purpose, value, or some grand notion. It's about <i>choice</i>. You can choose to give it deeper significance, or you can choose not to. You choose whether or not life has inherent value in it. You decide why you exist. You decide what, if any, purpose you should serve with your life. I'll finish up with a quote which may seem humorous in the context, but I'm presenting it seriously. <!--QuoteBegin-Obi wan Kenobi+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Obi wan Kenobi)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->You must do what you feel is right, of course.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
anyway, remember that at that point, the baby's neural infrastructure isn't fully developed. It would not feel pain quite like we do, although i'm not saying that they don't respond to negative stimuli. basically the first few years of a baby's life, the brain is still developing its sensory functions. also, if you die at an old age, the sensory functions that your brain performs start failing (note how old people get bad eyes and get hard of hearing).
as for living without a point to life...i would just like to comment that animals don't have an intrinsic value to living - as an individual. personally i like to think myself more valuable than an animal, but i suppose it depends on which viewpoint you take - whether humans are just the next step in an evolutionary process that will, eventually, leave us in the dust.
<!--QuoteBegin-EEK+May 20 2004, 04:04 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (EEK @ May 20 2004, 04:04 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Baby's do indeed feel pain, read that story about the child who has inactive pain receptors and you'll find out why it's necessary. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> yes, babies do feel pain. but is there sense of pain as acute right as its being born, compared to 6 months later? my guess is no, not nearly so.
Perhaps not, because a baby's skull squashes and deforms as it is born. Do that to a 30 year old man and I don't think 'pain' will adequently describe what he feels.
You exist to reporduce. your purpose, as is the purpose of all life on this planet, its to reproduce and make sure the race will continue existing.
some types of animal wil kill each otehr in order to survive themselves... this is partly becasue of the way that animals scocial structure works. it is also due to the law of "survival of the fitest." this is evident in a great deal of primate species where a single male controlls a group of females. the primate caste system ensures the best genes are reproduced and thus that the species will survive. in this situation the females form a community in which they raise young and saher food to serve the good of the many.
however other animals will live closely and shelter one another. they will defend themselves and aid their brethern. in this situation, the animals ither take up a mate for life or roam around an reproduce whenever able. it is usually the mothers role to care for the young untill they are self sufficent and can travel out to do the same.
in both cases, the males exist to roam and support themselves while mating at all possible times. also is the females responsibility to carry the males gentiic information and to reproduce as many young as possible in order to maintain the race.
mankind has a unique flaw that enables them to break out of the cycle. this flaw is the brain. we as humans have overdeveloped brains that allow us to utilize and create technology... though this is just another way of ensuring the future of the race. as the superbeings we are, we go unchecked as the top of all food chains and we are allwed to rule the planet creating and colonizing as we go. our caste and relationship systems have been completly formatted as our primal instincts. human children can barely breathe without constant aid and supervision, though with the lack of pre-programmed wisdom, we have the ability to attain any knowledge we want in any of infinant possibilities.
in closing, we can think, we can ponder our own existance because of our massive brains. but because we can comprehend and speculate all knowldge doesnt mean we arent driven by the same things as our animal cousins. we still strive to eat and seek shelter. we fight one another to gain status, but also protect each other from preators. we still exist to reproduce and ensure the future of the species, regardless of where it takes us and what stepps we have to take to overcome our self-destructive tendanceys.
One thing I find interesting is that if the Earth did cease to exist what would be lost in the end? It would be sad to us but really all that's lost is our knowledge that is almost infinitesimal and our sense of emotion/being, which also includes things like greed and materialism. What we have is useless to the existance of any other beings. So the universe will go on and we will be a spike in time that no one will miss. But don't worry about that. It doesn't really consern you now because you'll be long dead and it wont matter anymore. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Enf0rcer, for all you know, we might be the only sentient lifeforms in the universe. That would mean we're the only ones with any kind of knowledge(unless you count instincts as knowledge).
<!--QuoteBegin-Align+May 22 2004, 05:52 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Align @ May 22 2004, 05:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Enf0rcer, for all you know, we might be the only sentient lifeforms in the universe. That would mean we're the only ones with any kind of knowledge(unless you count instincts as knowledge). <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> exactly.. that makes us that much more useless. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
1.) I am not a Christian, nor am I a member of any religious sect or organization.
2.) I do not believe in "God," since human experience has limited our ability to describe such a being.
Now, into the post.
Chaos Theory proves that in real world mathematics (aka, nonlinear equations that cannot be solved), there is a pattern to everything, including chaos. Our world is defined by Chaos. Our world is not made up of complex polygons and 3 dimensional shapes. By looking at your hand, you see a whole new world of asymmetry that is just a little different from your friends or your parents. Look at your eyes. They're unique from everyone else's eyes. To understand the full scope of this, look up the Mandelbrot Set. It is infinity in a finite space. It goes on forever, and everytime you zoom into one spot of the Set, you will see more Sets of all sizes. Thus, there is a soul, proven through mathematics. Infinity in a finite space.
*Note, many mathematicians and physicists HATE Chaoticians, because it essentially makes their work and theories useless and worthless.*
Natural Selection could not have come up with a soul. Natural Selection is an entirely physical ideal. That does not mean that Natural Selection does not exist in some shape or form, but it does mean that Natural Selection is not an independent process. There must be some vast spiritual presence that forms the basis of the physical and meta-physical realms in which we dwell. As a human, we believe in "beginning" and "end," but since infinity exists in the real world, there is no real beginning and end.
There is a purpose to existence. There must be some reason that we have a soul and the energy of life. Can I pinpoint it on a satellite? No, I can't. But there is obviously a reason that unique individuals such as yourselves exist in the physical realm at this place and time. I've begun to feel that way myself, that, in the coming energy wars and economic collapses, my physical existence is here for a reason.
Comments
Any one you choose. Everything wil not become meaningless, having fun no longer becomes the soul purpose of life. What are you going to do about it?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If I'm not alive, I can't have fun, and dying is probably painful, ok? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why would dying be painful? Birth isn't. (At least, not for the baby.)
You could sit in your chair all day but that's not terribly exciting, you'd be better going and doing stuff like creating things to make both your own and others lives more enjoyable or seek some adventure. I don't know about things zeroing out either... after all one man invents CD and off the back of that we come to DVD technology. Whether the man who invented it is alive or not isn't really of much consequence anymore but the technology is because it lets us watch movies. This isn't a purpose that will fight evil, get you to heaven or really has any majorly epic, grandoise effect that would make invention or creation or living some amazing thing; but heck it makes life more interesting and convienent =3
I fail to see the point in arguing either, as legion points out, however for me it's to do with the fact that many people who turn to religion can't grasp life without a goal. If they could perhaps they wouldn't be religious (perhaps they would? I've yet to meet someone who fufils both... it seems rather exclusively; one or the other). I do see the ideals of living life with a point, and while it suits for some <u>I think</u> it's the wrong route to take. It's not a hard and fast fact, merely my own opinion after what I deemed to be properly weighing the sides.
Like most arguements surrounding such philosphical questions there's no way to 100% answer this stuff; you merely need to find the solution that sits best with you and have tolerance for others who disagree... not that I can talk on the patience part too well but at least I try =D
Just keep in mind that if you can't understand the view of those you argue against it's not going to be worth the while. While philosphocial arguements are often like two stubborn blind people debating the colour of an object, if you know the mindset of your opposition you can at least imagine why they've come to their position and perhaps then have a discussion that might go somewhere =/
Throwing misplaced remarks like 'people with no will to live' just displays a lack of knowledge of the subject at hand, or perhaps even a refusal to understand -.-
To be honest, it's almost downright insulting. It'd be akin to a non-believer saying you're someone who lives their life around a children's fairytale. Not true by any sense of understanding nor particularly constructive to the arguement but people deem it necessary to get wound up and throw in such nonsense all the same huh?
I know I find myself flying off the handle at some of the posts in here but perhaps it'd serve us all a little better to remember this is the 'discussion' forum not the 'make purposefully ignorant remarks designed to get a rise' forum. At least not when I last checked =o
Why would dying be painful? Birth isn't. (At least, not for the baby.) <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Birthing is very painful. Why do you think infants scream? It's because of the light hurting after having lived in darkness, and from the air forcing its way into the previously unused lungs(unused apart from the development of them).
And, since getting stabbed or shot hurts a bunch, I'm pretty sure dying by either also hurts.
We can't know that birth isn't painful for the baby. Pulled from a place of warm safety into a cold, cruel world? And, we know that birth is painful for the mother. I would say that dying certainly would (or at least could) be painful. A violent death, or a death by certain natural causes (heart attack, virulent disease) could be quite excruciating.
<!--QuoteBegin-Trevelyan+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Trevelyan)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->atheists and... Humanism (are they the same thing? sure seems like it)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They're different, they just seem like the same thing to you because they have the same basic premise: the lack of existence of a god or gods. I could claim that christianity and judaism are the same because they have the same basic premise, and many similar histories and principles, but I think we all agree that I would certainly be wrong.
<!--QuoteBegin-RaVe+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (RaVe)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->In order for something to truly exist, they must serve a purpose. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I disagree. Take a grain of sand in a desert. It serves no purpose. It does nothing. Without it, that desert would be the same, just with one less grain of sand. Yet, it exists. It's there, and we could go and take it, examine it, should we feel compelled to do so. I bet your response to this statement would be that I'm taking it too literally, that you meant a deeper significance; e.g. the difference between being alive and really living. If that's the case, I still disagree. Serving a particular purpose is a consequence of our choices. You don't have to serve a purpose.
This brings me to my main point, which has been touched on by others in passing, but largely overlooked by the thread. There has been some heated discussion here (particularly between the devout and non-religious types) about the purpose, meaning, or value of life, but as far as I can tell (and I think it's a safe assumption to make) no one's mind has been changed. And nor will anyone's mind be changed. And here's why. The purpose of existing is what ever you decide it is. The intrinsic value of life is a non-existent quality. A person, a mountain, every single thing that does or doesn't exist, none of them have any value by themselves. They only have the value that you give them. Life has no purpose until you decide on a purpose to apply to yourself. Descartes' notion of "I think, therefore I am" is a representation of a broader ideal: "It has purpose, meaning, or value because I give it that." One choice of purpose is as valid as any other. Existence isn't about purpose, value, or some grand notion. It's about <i>choice</i>. You can choose to give it deeper significance, or you can choose not to. You choose whether or not life has inherent value in it. You decide why you exist. You decide what, if any, purpose you should serve with your life. I'll finish up with a quote which may seem humorous in the context, but I'm presenting it seriously.
<!--QuoteBegin-Obi wan Kenobi+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Obi wan Kenobi)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->You must do what you feel is right, of course.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
anyway, remember that at that point, the baby's neural infrastructure isn't fully developed. It would not feel pain quite like we do, although i'm not saying that they don't respond to negative stimuli. basically the first few years of a baby's life, the brain is still developing its sensory functions. also, if you die at an old age, the sensory functions that your brain performs start failing (note how old people get bad eyes and get hard of hearing).
as for living without a point to life...i would just like to comment that animals don't have an intrinsic value to living - as an individual. personally i like to think myself more valuable than an animal, but i suppose it depends on which viewpoint you take - whether humans are just the next step in an evolutionary process that will, eventually, leave us in the dust.
yes, babies do feel pain. but is there sense of pain as acute right as its being born, compared to 6 months later? my guess is no, not nearly so.
This is terribly off topic though.
some types of animal wil kill each otehr in order to survive themselves... this is partly becasue of the way that animals scocial structure works. it is also due to the law of "survival of the fitest." this is evident in a great deal of primate species where a single male controlls a group of females. the primate caste system ensures the best genes are reproduced and thus that the species will survive. in this situation the females form a community in which they raise young and saher food to serve the good of the many.
however other animals will live closely and shelter one another. they will defend themselves and aid their brethern. in this situation, the animals ither take up a mate for life or roam around an reproduce whenever able. it is usually the mothers role to care for the young untill they are self sufficent and can travel out to do the same.
in both cases, the males exist to roam and support themselves while mating at all possible times. also is the females responsibility to carry the males gentiic information and to reproduce as many young as possible in order to maintain the race.
mankind has a unique flaw that enables them to break out of the cycle. this flaw is the brain. we as humans have overdeveloped brains that allow us to utilize and create technology... though this is just another way of ensuring the future of the race. as the superbeings we are, we go unchecked as the top of all food chains and we are allwed to rule the planet creating and colonizing as we go. our caste and relationship systems have been completly formatted as our primal instincts. human children can barely breathe without constant aid and supervision, though with the lack of pre-programmed wisdom, we have the ability to attain any knowledge we want in any of infinant possibilities.
in closing, we can think, we can ponder our own existance because of our massive brains. but because we can comprehend and speculate all knowldge doesnt mean we arent driven by the same things as our animal cousins. we still strive to eat and seek shelter. we fight one another to gain status, but also protect each other from preators. we still exist to reproduce and ensure the future of the species, regardless of where it takes us and what stepps we have to take to overcome our self-destructive tendanceys.
exactly.. that makes us that much more useless. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
1.) I am not a Christian, nor am I a member of any religious sect or organization.
2.) I do not believe in "God," since human experience has limited our ability to describe such a being.
Now, into the post.
Chaos Theory proves that in real world mathematics (aka, nonlinear equations that cannot be solved), there is a pattern to everything, including chaos. Our world is defined by Chaos. Our world is not made up of complex polygons and 3 dimensional shapes. By looking at your hand, you see a whole new world of asymmetry that is just a little different from your friends or your parents. Look at your eyes. They're unique from everyone else's eyes. To understand the full scope of this, look up the Mandelbrot Set. It is infinity in a finite space. It goes on forever, and everytime you zoom into one spot of the Set, you will see more Sets of all sizes. Thus, there is a soul, proven through mathematics. Infinity in a finite space.
*Note, many mathematicians and physicists HATE Chaoticians, because it essentially makes their work and theories useless and worthless.*
Natural Selection could not have come up with a soul. Natural Selection is an entirely physical ideal. That does not mean that Natural Selection does not exist in some shape or form, but it does mean that Natural Selection is not an independent process. There must be some vast spiritual presence that forms the basis of the physical and meta-physical realms in which we dwell. As a human, we believe in "beginning" and "end," but since infinity exists in the real world, there is no real beginning and end.
There is a purpose to existence. There must be some reason that we have a soul and the energy of life. Can I pinpoint it on a satellite? No, I can't. But there is obviously a reason that unique individuals such as yourselves exist in the physical realm at this place and time. I've begun to feel that way myself, that, in the coming energy wars and economic collapses, my physical existence is here for a reason.
At least that’s the way I look at it.