A thread for intellegent debate not trolling (Meaning of life)
Forums › General Discussion › A thread for intellegent debate not trolling (Meaning of life)-
DMT ftw!
-
Brown Note 😻🌺🌈 wrote:
The Rhino wrote:
Why not? Why not believe the most logical, simple answer? Why not see love, respect and empathy as what science reaveals them to be?But I feel I need to reiterate I am not trying to prove you wrong. Simply, the dubject is not as simple as you insist it is.
Because sciences explanation of love for example falls very short of describing the feeling.
-
The Rhino wrote:
I don't think it does. Love has an obvious function in evolution. Because you have an emotional experience that is frankly less intense than some drugs, it has to be a connection to some invisible universal network? It's no less a feeling in some animals, and non-existent in others. It's not a reasonable assumption that a euphoric feeling is an indication of something bigger than we can comprehend.Brown Note 😻🌺🌈 wrote:
The Rhino wrote:
Why not? Why not believe the most logical, simple answer? Why not see love, respect and empathy as what science reaveals them to be?But I feel I need to reiterate I am not trying to prove you wrong. Simply, the dubject is not as simple as you insist it is.
Because sciences explanation of love for example falls very short of describing the feeling.
-
Say that to someone who has not been in love and you think they will understand what live is?
-
Love^
-
Science is good at explaining how but not why. I think it is very difficult to derive the conclusions that are being derived here from the actual evidence provided by science.
-
Brown Note 😻🌺🌈 wrote:
What do you think science revealed them to be? For instance, describing chemical relationships does not take validity as significant meaning away from a feeling.The Rhino wrote:
Why not? Why not believe the most logical, simple answer? Why not see love, respect and empathy as what science reaveals them to be?But I feel I need to reiterate I am not trying to prove you wrong. Simply, the dubject is not as simple as you insist it is.
-
The Rhino wrote:
@Brown it is much more evident just how connected we are to everything if we look at neurological studies of the human brain. Also, science has showed how much more interconnected we are with everything around us.Brown Note 😻🌺🌈 wrote:
Walking precisely is in your head. If you were a stegosaurus, it would be in your ass.
So it sounds like you are saying that just because drug induced hallucinations are created by the brain, doesn't mean that the effects are not actually happening around the animal? Even though nobody else observes the effects, because it can't be disproven, it might be true?
It doesn't take more than common sense to take what science gives us and conclude that we are all disconnected from everything beyond our own skin.
I see conections all the time, love, respect, empathy. You need to open your eyes
-
Brown Note 😻🌺🌈 wrote:
I was politely showing interest in your opinion. I did not ask your religion as it is apparent you do not have an interest in that. Anyhow, I find it a pleasure to discuss things like this. It is nice if we can keep things polite for sake of conversation.Mr. Ikslopot wrote: Nice. Would you consider yourself a nihilist or materialist?
No.I am a collection organisms that exist in this form because they were the most successful in duplicating themselves.
Why should I label my belief in this fact? You are asking me to name my religion, when in fact, religion is a construct of mental masterbation.
-
Mr. Ikslopot wrote:
Science is good at explaining how but not why. I think it is very difficult to derive the conclusions that are being derived here from the actual evidence provided by science.
That's my point, science is the wrong tool to use. But so many ignore anything else
-
I also don't think the stegosaurus example holds up well. 😉
-
Sorry. I just disagree. Millions of chickens die every day. Exactly which connections come and go with them?
-
For an item to have meaning it needs a context to derive meaning from. Finding meaning is high level functioning. For instance, playing piano provides a high amount of stimulous for the brain according to experiments within the field of neurology. The activity stimulates many parts of the brain in order to provide a bit of entertainment on a Saturday night for a young couple to fall in love. The meaning of the event is multiple. To derive content from this is a natural psychological response. Similarly, Picasso noticed that the human mind loves to personify the inanimate which is an obvious example of abstraction. Abstraction is a valid form of relating to the world. Language itself relies on these connections.
-
Speaking of neuroscience, my brother's first job at NIH was training spider monkeys to perform specific functions. Then, their brains were manipulated with surgery, and then they were re-tested to see the results. He's finishing up his doctorate now in Boston. I think he'd agree with the basic idea that everything we experience is between our ears.
-
Mr. Ikslopot wrote:
See, that's what I'm talking about. These are not spiritual or metaphysical connections. These are entirely internal brain functions. Back to the point of the thread... There is no purpose or meaning, no designer, no spiritual connection..........The meaning of the event is multiple. To derive content from this is a natural psychological response. Similarly, Picasso noticed that the human mind loves to personify the inanimate which is an obvious example of abstraction. Abstraction is a valid form of relating to the world. Language itself relies on these connections.
-
Brown Note 😻🌺🌈 wrote:
Thank you for the apology.Sorry. I just disagree. Millions of chickens die every day. Exactly which connections come and go with them?
I don't think your opinion is invalid. In fact, I am pretty sure it could be argued by me. I am just trying to connect abstractions, for instance your chickens, with your argument for meaninglessness. It seems to me that your argument is substantiated within the arts much better than science. The theater of the absurd would be a great example. Also, Dada.
I can connect ideas together logically in a story and it still remains the story of a chimera. The fact it is fiction does not take away from possible significance of the story to real life. A good example would be Aesop's Fables which provide a much more sophisticated argument than much 'serious reads' I have read for situations one may find themselves in in this big world.
-
Brown Note 😻🌺🌈 wrote:
I don't see why a divine designer is needed; however, I think that meaning exists in the world. Otherwise, how are we even conversing here? 'Spiritual' is a feeling. Feelings are real.Mr. Ikslopot wrote:
See, that's what I'm talking about. These are not spiritual or metaphysical connections. These are entirely internal brain functions. Back to the point of the thread... There is no purpose or meaning, no designer, no spiritual connection..........The meaning of the event is multiple. To derive content from this is a natural psychological response. Similarly, Picasso noticed that the human mind loves to personify the inanimate which is an obvious example of abstraction. Abstraction is a valid form of relating to the world. Language itself relies on these connections.
Also, sometimes the best designs are simply wonderful accidents.
-
It's painful to know it's all pointless, isn't it?
-
Brown Note 😻🌺🌈 wrote:
Why painful? It is exhilarating and liberating to imagine that significance is fabricated by interpretation of events and analysis. It reflects the strength of our imagination. What wonderous resource! When living like this one can have a lightness of being just as easily as a sulking disposition.It's painful to know it's all pointless, isn't it?
Meaning is there.
-
The Rhino wrote:
I wish more would pay attention to science.Mr. Ikslopot wrote:
Science is good at explaining how but not why. I think it is very difficult to derive the conclusions that are being derived here from the actual evidence provided by science.
That's my point, science is the wrong tool to use. But so many ignore anything else
-
Brown Note 😻🌺🌈 wrote:
Studies have shown that organizing material like this serves to help us remember details. Brb. I have a significant article that refers to this.Mr. Ikslopot wrote:
See, that's what I'm talking about. These are not spiritual or metaphysical connections. These are entirely internal brain functions. Back to the point of the thread... There is no purpose or meaning, no designer, no spiritual connection..........The meaning of the event is multiple. To derive content from this is a natural psychological response. Similarly, Picasso noticed that the human mind loves to personify the inanimate which is an obvious example of abstraction. Abstraction is a valid form of relating to the world. Language itself relies on these connections.
-
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/02/20/magazine/mind-secrets.html?ref=todayspaper
-
Mr. Ikslopot wrote:
I don't see why a divine designer is needed; however, I think that meaning exists in the world. Otherwise, how are we even conversing here? 'Spiritual' is a feeling. Feelings are real.
Also, sometimes the best designs are simply wonderful accidents. -
So 3 pages of arguing wether or not their is meaning. But is that all that should be discussed? Unfortunately these threads often turn into the same argument, yet there is more to the OPs question.
So let's assume for the sake of it that there is meaning. In particular, if there is a meaning outside our own minds what do people believe it is. I'm interested to know.
-
There are only a dozen thinkers in this game. Of them, we three are the only ones foolish enough to waste time in the forums. 😝
-
Brown Note 😻🌺🌈 wrote:
There are only a dozen thinkers in this game. Of them, we three are the only ones foolish enough to waste time in the forums. 😝
Tbh I wouldnt be if I wasn't bound by this week of no DBR/TWFC threads
-
Assumption of meaning outside of the head...
Hmm, an inherent thingness of being.
would this be an overarching meaning of the universe, holistic as it were. Or attributable meanings to seperate objects? -
slugboy wrote:
Assumption of meaning outside of the head...
Hmm, an inherent thingness of being.
would this be an overarching meaning of the universe, holistic as it were. Or attributable meanings to seperate objects?Meaning derived from a force other than ourselves as We've had that discussion.
Example: God(s)
For those who believe in such things, what could be the point of life? More than that, what could the point of the universe be? -
Lol. I was just about to post this and you beat me to it. I am just delighted we have established agreed grounds to even begin answering the question ' Lol. I was just about to post this and you beat me to it. I am just delighted we have established a point to even begin answering the question ' what is the meaning of life?'
@ Brown Yeah, philosophy is an acquired taste. Lol. I'm just appreciative to have found a couple individuals to discuss these questions with. It is a lot of fun. 😄
-
@ Slugboy I am having a difficult time making out what you are saying. Please, elaborate.
@ Rhino I really enjoy talking with believers. St Augustine, Thomas Aquitas, Thomas Hobbs were all interesting to read. The most interesting and life affirming statement I ever heard was from a Zen monk. I asked him if he believed in an afterlife and he said, "I believe in you."
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC