I don't answer the door for you guys, stay off my internet too!
What's the point of life?
- Thread starter WickedLiquid
- Start date
Delta47
Rookie
http://htwins.net/scale2/?bordercolor=white
I'm not sure if anyone has seen this before but, if you look at it you can realize truly how insignificant we are in the universe.
There is no meaning to life, it just happens to be there. just like the reason for having planets and stars, it just is.
I'm not sure if anyone has seen this before but, if you look at it you can realize truly how insignificant we are in the universe.
There is no meaning to life, it just happens to be there. just like the reason for having planets and stars, it just is.
Bretimus_v2
So tired.
For me, the meaning of life is to find things that make us happy. It is afterall what draws us to all things that we end up spending a lot of time doing. There are many types of happiness. It can be both short-term or long-term. It can be a happiness that remains unchangeable over time and pleasant with each repeat visit over the years. Controversely, it can be happy until it reaches a breaking point, and then turn into something negative. There is even happiness that can be found in the challenging, hard and disappointing. I think we all drive to be happy in some way, shape or form. Irregardless of religion, logic, or biological imperative, we seek out activities, people and experiences to enrich our lives.
I personally believe in the divine. I believe in our insiginificance on a universal level and our supreme significance in the lives of those we love.
Carry on.
I personally believe in the divine. I believe in our insiginificance on a universal level and our supreme significance in the lives of those we love.
Carry on.
De-Ting
Rookie
http://tinyurl.com/898hluhDelta47 said:
Do you mean that we are still evolving, or are you trying to say that the concept of evolution is incomplete with us?spartan317 said:
Obviously this statement is relevant to what your beliefs are about life and what one ought to do with it, or work towards. Posing your beliefs as simple facts isn't very helpful.
You are a product of what came before, just as what follows will be a product of the present. No?WickedLiquid said:
This is true, but I think the more relevant fear is that of permanence, impermanence, and consequence. People are scared of making unfavourable decisions knowing that they can't be undone.UrbanMasque said:
Many people claim to know the answer to many things. It doesn't necessarily reflect the truth, or carry significance to other individuals.De-Ting said:
I think meaning and purpose can be separate questions, although usually related. I like what you say. Given that all sorts of things can make us happy -- good and bad, as you point out -- when I look at it, it seems like everything is making us happy, overall and in general. So I often tell people that it's not about finding the meaning of life, but that life is made meaningful through experience. (This is like my catchphrase.)Bretimus_v2 said:
Not entirely with you on the former. Completely with you on the latter.
Wicked, if you are seriously pursuing this topic, there are a number of other issues are relevant to your enquiry: the supernatural, free will, consciousness, … all the philosophical problems, really. Establishing a logical/rational grasp of these other concepts will give life context and lead to further understanding of this greater question.
StickyGreenGamer
Rookie
I believe there is no meaning. There is no purpose. No more than other animals.
Perhaps there was a purpose, but it passed us. Like maybe there was some giant monster or alien lifeforms that needed to be dealt with, so we were brought into existence. Once done, something simply forgot to take us out of existence so we persisted.
Or perhaps it is coming. Like now. Or now. Or tomorrow. Or now.
Do people create reasons to avoid feeling hollow? Perhaps.
I'm hollow, watch, I'll put my hand right through myself.
Perhaps there was a purpose, but it passed us. Like maybe there was some giant monster or alien lifeforms that needed to be dealt with, so we were brought into existence. Once done, something simply forgot to take us out of existence so we persisted.
Or perhaps it is coming. Like now. Or now. Or tomorrow. Or now.
Do people create reasons to avoid feeling hollow? Perhaps.
I'm hollow, watch, I'll put my hand right through myself.
Rakon
Rookie
I can't fucking stand when people answer this question using this answer. They think they are being so clever because they are referencing a sci-fi/comedy book that they most likely have not read. If you did read it, you'd know that 42 isn't the meaning of life, it's the answer to the ultimate question. It's the question that we don't know, which is the brilliant philosophical point that Adams is trying to make: we can't know the answer, because we don't know the question.
So no, 42 isn't the meaning of life, according to the book that people reference when answering this. It's like saying that god hates gays because it says it in the bible, even though it doesn't say that in the bible.
The meaning of life is balance btw.
danielrbischoff
Rookie
10 points to Rakon.
Well, the Ultimate Question is of life, the universe, and everything. So it does fit, because they're asking why everything is.Rakon said:
And the other thing is that in many of the other books, it still comes up, even with people who don't know the outcome. And the simplicity of the answer of "42" says more than just that we don't know the question, but perhaps the question and the answer are just, that, simple. What if all this time we've been searching the ends of the universe for the answer, and it's right in front of us all along? What if the hokey pokey is really what it's all about? While I wouldn't quite call Adams a genius, he's a very, very clever man, so there's more to it than what's just outright stated in the book.
Basically, it represents the whole "we'll never know" part of the meaning of everything in all sorts of ways. So why not say it? If some people just go "HA! Hitchhikers. I loved that movie!" Then fuck them. But if you sacrifice something truly deep and beautiful because of idiots, then they win, and you lose. And when idiots win, no one wins.
And that also ties into my purpose. I believe it's my duty to keep idiots from winning. That's the answer I've found, so I'm going to keep doing it.
spartan317
Rookie
Sightless said:
Both
The theory of evolution still has some holes. I think that we should only except something as fact if we can prove it unequivocally. Evolutionism still leaves room for speculation.
Also I'm a firm believer in that man has not finished evolving yet. We have sooo much untapped potential just waiting. Hell as it stands the human body is capable of living to 150 years were it not for our enviroment and society.
Longo_2_guns said:
Who is John Galt?
Okay, thanks for clarifying.
With regard to the theory of evolution, I just want to be clear that while you may refer to it as a theory in a scientific sense, I get the feeling that you're actually referring to the theory of Natural Selection..? In any case, what would you require as proof? I think we have what one might call overwhelming evidence for evolution/"evolutionism" (what is that, anyway? The belief of not rejecting scientific evidence?), so I'm not sure what you would like to see.
On your other point, I don't think it's appropriate to talk about evolution as if it's an entity that has an end goal in mind -- it's simply a process that is ongoing. Thus there is no "finish" to evolution, whether we talk about man or life as a whole. Even if we posit a world where all environmental pressures cease to exist (I don't believe that such a world could exist, but I'm willing to try to pretend), which is possibly what you're talking about with the lifespan of the human body, mutations would occur that change our genetics. Possibly we would live only to die of old age. However, assuming that we still don't have environmental pressure to select which genes get passed on or not, those mutations would become expressed and I would say that that would still be considered evolution, just acting under principles that are different from Natural Selection.
With regard to the theory of evolution, I just want to be clear that while you may refer to it as a theory in a scientific sense, I get the feeling that you're actually referring to the theory of Natural Selection..? In any case, what would you require as proof? I think we have what one might call overwhelming evidence for evolution/"evolutionism" (what is that, anyway? The belief of not rejecting scientific evidence?), so I'm not sure what you would like to see.
On your other point, I don't think it's appropriate to talk about evolution as if it's an entity that has an end goal in mind -- it's simply a process that is ongoing. Thus there is no "finish" to evolution, whether we talk about man or life as a whole. Even if we posit a world where all environmental pressures cease to exist (I don't believe that such a world could exist, but I'm willing to try to pretend), which is possibly what you're talking about with the lifespan of the human body, mutations would occur that change our genetics. Possibly we would live only to die of old age. However, assuming that we still don't have environmental pressure to select which genes get passed on or not, those mutations would become expressed and I would say that that would still be considered evolution, just acting under principles that are different from Natural Selection.
WickedLiquid
Regular
I've asked the same question to everyone who has told me evolution is plausible: "If we came from monkeys why are there still monkeys?*
And the answer is always "I dunno."
And the answer is always "I dunno."
If man evolved from monkeys then how come the monkeys in the zoo don't just "evolve" and become people and walk out? Huh? Can you answer that?!
Didn't think so!
Me - 1
You - 0
Didn't think so!
Me - 1
You - 0
Eyebrowsbv31
Rookie
Boobs, I thought this was answered decades ago.
