what if the logical reasoning behind the metaphysical elements in th context also be not just physically but also in a mental sense behind the evidence. If it is not so, why are we to believe it?

Not sure what you mean by "evidence"....

you claim that meaning can be permanent, which I disagreed with. Metaphysical conditions change over time and therefore as the philosophy behind the meaning of life, demonstrated by the ardent philosopher Hume, can change.

I claim that meaning can NOT be permanent!

in that many years people would get used to pain, so it would loose its importance.

so is suicide thing to do,rational? (because life ends in death) or should I seek treatment for suicidal ideations and wait for death to come by itself? I really need a reason to see what to do :/

I'm really confused what to do..don't want to seem desperate, but I don't see a reason (now) why I should go on. It just makes sense - life will end in death so let's get it over with. Please provide your opinions why this is/isn't true for you.

From what I have read I do feel that suicide is irrational in most cases, just I'm not convinced.

I think that for me the reason why I don't want to go through it is family and friends, don't want to cause them suffering.
Just don't know how to battle my thoughts.

Any input is greatly appreciated and I know that this is probably not the place to post this, just I'm in need of help.

I know I don't want to live forever because that would be a drag, but I feel instinctively deep down in my unconscious like i want to live forever. It feels that if I don't live forever then everything I do is just a waste of effort. Yet despite this, I know that the appreciation of beauty does not depend on eternal existence. How can such contradictory thoughts/feelings be imputed on to the mind of man? — intrapersona

Such meaning comes from spirituality, a spirituality that allows for a spiritual life that transcends a single physical life. Evidence of such an extended spiritual life would be persistence of skills that learned and developed during a physical life. Evidence of such persistent memory can be found in inherited, innate skills, some of which seem quite extraordinary as in the case of child prodigies.

Explore the possibility of persistence of memory in an extended spiritual life that transcends multiple physical lives.

The question "What's the point of living?" makes a lot more sense than "What's the point of living if you eventually die?". The latter begs the question and is often a non sequitur. It can be just as absurd as asking "What's the point of living if Jupiter is the fifth planet from the Sun?".

What's the point of living if you eventually die? Well, I don't think you need a "point" to live. You just do.

Other that that, there is the enjoyment of life, and there is the extreme fear of death.

Bitter Crank,

I must thank you. I have just read your "sage" advice to Intrapersona (above) and the sheer comic foolishness of your "Impermanent Meaningfulness" thesis actually made me laugh out loud; something I hadn't done for a long time ! The fact that you had even underlined the word "meaningfulness" in the phrase was just too much - it totally cracked me up! ( Ha !! You ARE a card, Crank - you most definately ARE a card !)

Therefore, I hereby propose to this forum that we should officially declare the squawk "Impermanent Meaningfulness !" to be the definitive, native cry of the modern-day , common or garden variety, "Nihilist Chicken Bird" ! (NB: related to - but not to be confused with - Mr Charles Dickens' famous "High Cockalorum Bird").

All those in favour say "Aye" !

Regards

John

What's the point of living if you eventually die? Well, I don't think you need a "point" to live. You just do. — szardosszemagad

Of course you need a point to live. Ask anyone who you think "just does" why they haven't killed themselves, and they'll give you that point.

You don't have to be conscious of it all of the time, which might be where you've picked up this misconception, but it's there like a failsafe.

@rossii

The survival instinct is too strong in most people to go through with suicide. Add to that the thought of your loved ones' suffering (even if you aren't going to be there to witness it), and it becomes an even more difficult task.

So if you can reason out that the chance of you actually committing suicide is really quite low, maybe you can shift start shifting your focus away from it a little bit at a time. The thoughts will continue to surface, but when they do, you can say to yourself 'No, that's not really going to happen, so I'm not going to spend time and energy considering the possibility'. Kind of similar to planning your life based on winning the lottery - it's very likely not going to happen, so it doesn't make sense to invest your thoughts and emotions in that possibility.

As for living, try not to focus too much on meaning and purpose, because that can just send you back down the rabbit hole if you can't find something to focus on that is 'worth living for'. Make sure your basic needs are satisfied - eat, exercise, sleep, build relationships - and make life as interesting and pleasant as possible - find hobbies, interact with people, spend time in nature, avoid excessive use of alcohol and drugs.

These things have helped me get to a place where I feel relatively stable, after having dealt with severe depression on and off for over a decade.

If you are severely depressed, you may need the help of medication and cognitive behavioral therapy to get you started on the right path. Medication can relieve the depressive symptoms and suicidal thinking temporarily, while you begin the work of restructuring your thought patterns and beliefs.

A good reason to live is that change is excitng and change can only be witnessed, discovered, experienced or initiated by the living.

One day the universe will be cold and dead-full of the permanent meaningfulness that some people seem to crave. But not today! Thankfully we are allowed the "impermanent meaningfulness " referred to by @Bitter Crank

@John Gould @Bitter Crank @Jake Tarragon

I think this idea of 'impermanent meaningfulness' has some value as well, especially to those who are vulnerable to experiencing depression. Reminds me of Don Miguel Ruiz Jr's book on the Five Levels of Attachment. While you can add value and meaning to your life by building attachments to people, ideas, and things, you should understand and expect that life is always changing, and that you may be forced to shift your attention to different sources of meaning throughout your life. People die, things are lost, and beliefs change. When you put all of your eggs in one basket, it is much more traumatic when unexpected change occurs. Loving one person to the exclusion of all others, believing too fervently in a religion, basing your happiness on material things, building an identity that you believe to be the 'real you', or other forms of unhealthy attachment, can all lead to negative future mental states when the basis of your attachment is removed.

That sounds good advice CasKev. I'm sure depression is a misery and my sympathies lie with anyone suffering from it. (Not sure I have so much sympathy for JG's viewpoint however!)

Of course you need a point to live. Ask anyone who you think "just does" why they haven't killed themselves, and they'll give you that point. — Sapientia

I still think you don't need a point to live. You will provide a point or an alleged point when forced, or questioned, but that is not a "need" per se. Life is effortlessly continued. (In an existentialist sense, not that survival is automatic or even easy.) It takes a heckuva lot more effort to kill yourself than to not to kill yourself.

A good reason to live is that change is excitng and change can only be witnessed, discovered, experienced or initiated by the living. — Jake Tarragon

This is true, as long as the changes are small and manageable. For instance, the biggest change in life, that is, changing from being alive to being dead, is not so exciting, although you can't imagine a bigger change.

A good reason to live is that change is excitng and change can only be witnessed, discovered, experienced or initiated by the living. — Jake Tarragon

As far as the living knows. The dead may be experiencing even bigger changes, or permanent exciting happiness (rapture). They don't tell you that, the dead don't. If you found a free source of incredibly rich entertainment, you would keep it a secret, too.

The dead may be deaf and mute, but they are not dumb. Not necessarily, anyway. And they could be incredibly joyful and happy, for all we know. In fact, there are entire religions that focus their attention on how to attain that state.

One supporting evidence of this is that we know for sure, or see and experience for sure, when the living go into a dead state, but the dead don't go into a living state. There is a remote possibility that they do, but they are not documented, and I for one never saw an obvious case of it myself. But I saw and heard of many cases of the living becoming dead.

I still think you don't need a point to live. You will provide a point or an alleged point when forced, or questioned, but that is not a "need" per se. — szardosszemagad

Perhaps you need a point to live well?

I still think you don't need a point to live. You will provide a point or an alleged point when forced, or questioned, but that is not a "need" per se. Life is effortlessly continued. (In an existentialist sense, not that survival is automatic or even easy.) It takes a heckuva lot more effort to kill yourself than to not to kill yourself. — szardosszemagad

Well, yes, living is a continual process, until it ceases, and that process itself doesn't require any point. But living is like a car, and we are the drivers. As a driver, you can either hit the brakes and stop the car or you can carry on driving. People don't tend to drive around aimlessly, with no destination in mind, for no reason whatsoever. Life doesn't need a point, but we need a point to our lives - those of us who are reasonable, at least.

Perhaps you need a point to live well? — Jake Tarragon

You need a point to live at all, unless you've lost or abandoned reason, in which case it wouldn't matter whether your next act was to watch a film or blow your brains out.

You need a point to live at all, unless you've lost or abandoned reason, in which case it wouldn't matter whether your next act was to watch a film or blow your brains out. — Sapientia

I beg to differ. You don't need a point to live at all. Many things live which supposedly don't have a point to do so, including all the plants.

I don't know where you get this idea to justify your continuation to live. Perhaps to YOU it is important. I shan't engage in trying to find out why. But please believe me, you can't extrapolate from your own stance to all living things or even to all mankind.

Bears don't have a point to live. Bugs don't. Snakes don't. Sea urchins don't. Jellyfish don't. Why would humans need one? Are we that different from frogs and crocodiles and caterpillars in the very sense that we are all alive?

Well, yes, living is a continual process, until it ceases, and that process itself doesn't require any point. But living is like a car, and we are the drivers. As a driver, you can either hit the brakes and stop the car or you can carry on driving. People don't tend to drive around aimlessly, with no destination in mind, for no reason whatsoever. Life doesn't need a point, but we need a point to our lives - those of us who are reasonable, at least. — Sapientia

I don't think stopping the car is equivalent to dying. It is equivalent to a rest, because you can start after a rest, much like you can start a car.

You are right, to continue with your metaphor, you need a destination to drive; but that's akin to having to dress up, to buy groceries, to take a shower. These are needs that come up and you satisfy them. These are not points.

What do you even mean to have a point to live? What is an example to a "point"? Please give us a few, and then perhaps we can come to an agreement, because it is conceivable that I'm grossly misunderstanding you.

What would be a good a good example of a "point" that would stop you Sapientia, from giving up life? Perhaps you could supply a number of such points, so we can establish a pattern, and through that, an understanding.

but let's say until my death life will be filled with nothing but joy and good times... then I still die, so what was the point :/?
I can take medication to make me feel good, to make me stop thinking about these things, then also die.

So what's the rational reason to go on living?

@rossii

Like you already mentioned, though you likely wouldn't be around to witness it, your untimely death would cause a lot of suffering to those around you. That alone is reason enough for most people to avoid suicide, even when severely depressed.

Reason number two for me is the possibility of making your life worse due to a failed suicide attempt, whether from brain damage, paralysis, or simply the guilt from having tried to end your life. At this point, you may be incapable or carrying out suicide, or lose the desire to end your life, and you'll be stuck with whatever came of your failed attempt.

And while I currently believe that our existence ends with death of the human body, there is still a chance that some sort of 'soul' survives. If this 'soul' retains any sort of memory of our human existence, the guilt of hurting the people who loved me isn't something I would want to carry around for eternity. That's assuming there isn't some system of reward/punishment that follows this life (I know, highly unlikely, but still a possibility), in which case I'm thinking suicide would be viewed unfavorably.

I beg to differ. You don't need a point to live at all. Many things live which supposedly don't have a point to do so, including all the plants.

I don't know where you get this idea to justify your continuation to live. Perhaps to YOU it is important. I shan't engage in trying to find out why. But please believe me, you can't extrapolate from your own stance to all living things or even to all mankind.

Bears don't have a point to live. Bugs don't. Snakes don't. Sea urchins don't. Jellyfish don't. Why would humans need one? Are we that different from frogs and crocodiles and caterpillars in the very sense that we are all alive? — szardosszemagad

It is ridiculous to compare humans to animals and plants in that way. I was certainly not extrapolating my stance to all living things. Did anyone here genuinely believe that I meant to include plants, frogs and sea urchins in what I was talking about?

I'm not starting from my own isolated stance and then extrapolating to all mankind. I don't believe that you are so ignorant that you are not aware of the vast number of people who share my stance. We are all human, and we have in common human psychology. It is the stance of the vast majority, as well as the default position, to have a point to one's life. Just ask around. There is, however, a small minority who would say that there's no point to their life, most likely because of denial or depression.

You make a lot of assumptions. 1. I must know a vast number of people who need a point in their lives. 2. We all have a common psychology. 3. The default position is universal. 4. People who have no point in life are so because of denial or depression.

I don't share any of these assumptions with you. The closest we have in agreement is that we all have a somewhat similar psychology to each other's. This is only to a point; there are more differences in degrees of aspects of human psychology than not. You can say we all like to be loved, but some of us need it more than others, and some of us don't need it at all, as an example.

Your point may be shared with others, but you have not convinced me. I don't see a necessity to having a point in life to keep on living.

In fact, the nature of the point is debatable, too, not just its existence as a prerequisite to continue living.

Please, if you wouldn't mind, give us some examples, or else a categorical explanation of what you consider a "point". Maybe we are not in disagreement at all, conceptually, it's just that "point", point is undefined and not necessarily understood by me the same way as by you.

So please give a few examples or a general fully delineating definition of what you consider a point to live by or for. Thanks.

I don't think stopping the car is equivalent to dying. It is equivalent to a rest, because you can start after a rest, much like you can start a car. — szardosszemagad

Are you being serious? Obviously you can't start living again after you've died. And if you're just nitpicking at my imperfect analogy, then, really, what's the point? Just as obviously, you can of course start a car after stopping. Did you think that I'd overlooked that? I had not. Don't stretch the analogy beyond where it was intended to go. Next you'll be telling me that life doesn't have wheels and an engine!

You are right, to continue with your metaphor, you need a destination to drive; but that's akin to having to dress up, to buy groceries, to take a shower. These are needs that come up and you satisfy them. These are not points. — szardosszemagad

Without a point to it all, why would people be getting dressed, taking showers, buying groceries, and so on, rather than driving off of a cliff edge? We're talking about people, not robots.

What do you even mean to have a point to live? What is an example to a "point"? Please give us a few, and then perhaps we can come to an agreement, because it is conceivable that I'm grossly misunderstanding you.

What would be a good a good example of a "point" that would stop you Sapientia, from giving up life? Perhaps you could supply a number of such points, so we can establish a pattern, and through that, an understanding. — szardosszemagad

It can be virtually anything, but typically not what you call a "need" above. There are few people who I think would answer that their preference for life over death, their reason for being here, is that they need to take a shower or buy some groceries.

I don't actually believe that you need any examples, as if you're some kind of robot or alien who is studying humanity from an outside perspective. You're one of us. I have family and friends, and there are things that I enjoy in life. So do you, most likely. That's a very common reason to continue to live rather than opt for suicide.

Why can't you give a point as an example? I don't accept your reason for withholding that information.

I think you are bluffing. You claim everyone or at least a vast number of people have a point to live. So it can't be all that hard, embarrassing or such a secret as to withhold giving me a few examples of points.

You just admitted by not giving examples that your claim is invalid, and false.

I have family and friends, and there are things that I enjoy in life. So do you, most likely. That's a very common reason to continue to live rather than opt for suicide. — Sapientia

That's more obvious than obvious. I thought you had had a point. A point which is more profound.

This is the best you can provide as philosophy? "People don't kill themselves because they enjoy life." Well, food tastes good so you will eat it, you scratch your back when it itches because it feels good, girls look good so you will procreate, etc etc.

"You live because you enjoy life."

I can't believe what passes for philosophy around here.