Meaning and purpose only obtain teleologically; otherwise it's just a nihilistic sham. — Noble Dust
what does that mean for what we actually think? — Pseudonym
One of those desires might well be for an eternity in bliss, but I have no idea what this might be like, nor how to go about ensuring it happens, so it is irrelevant to my meaning and purpose in life. — Pseudonym
I've (erroneously) attributed religious claims to your argument because it seems to me that only by making religious claims can the persuit of anything outside of our sensory experience become meaningful. Unless we just guess? — Pseudonym
It means that meaning relates to something outside of time. — Noble Dust
why would this lack of knowledge mean that the concept is irrelevant to your meaning or purpose in life? — Noble Dust
Even something so simple as the distinction between religion and spirituality, with all of it's stigmas, would, at the very least, clarify your confusion here. — Noble Dust
OK, so what is this 'something' outside of time to which it relates, and how do you know that meaning relates to something outside of time, is this a guess, intuition or rationally derived?
All the while it seems we're no closer to the idea of 'purpose' which is much more clearly defined. Purpose is the reason why we do something, the goal (either ultimate or proximate). I'm suggesting that goal is unavoidably the satisfaction of those desires which are self-evidently present. No further 'purpose' seems to be justified. — Pseudonym
And I'm suggesting that your "purpose" is meaningless because it dies once you die.
A purpose that actually is purposeful is a purpose that exists outside of time; outside of one's lifetime. — Noble Dust
How will you preserve that meaning in posterity, for yourself, personally, after your own death? — Noble Dust
I get the feeling I'm never going to understand this. "Meaning and purpose only obtain teleologicallly" - what does that mean for what we actually think? — Pseudonym
The same calculating mind that supports this also shows the futility of all human endeavor, relative to this desire at its most absolute. — foo
Why futile? — Pseudonym
One function of God has arguably been satisfy the unruly itch to transcend time and chance, or attain permanent status and security for one's essence if not one's body. — foo
I don't honestly think people can actually get their heads round 'infinity', and most people when they talk about it are really just imagining 'a very long time'. — Pseudonym
Religion may play into the desire to strive for something that goes on beyond death, but I'm highly doubtful that it actually satisfies. — Pseudonym
There is a hierarchy, hierarchies cannot be eliminated, and that hierarchy is based on competency.
— Agustino
Circular and laughably naive, no wonder you readily subscribe to Peterson's vapid "self-help" philosophy. — Maw
Nope, this is more propaganda because it's not qualified. White people may be largely invisible to themselves in SOME parts of the Western world, but you try going to the Middle East and see how "invisible" to yourself you are there. If you think that what is going on between whites and other races in the West is racism, just have a look at some places in the Middle East like Saudi Arabia and you'll be horrified.White people are largely invisible to themselves in a way that different toned ethenticities can never be. — Cavacava
White people are largely invisible to themselves in a way that different toned ethenticities can never be. — Cavacava
I think this exemplifies a flaw in the English language. I read Cava's statement as meaning 'invisible to each other' - ie their skin colour is invisible to other whites, not as each person being invisible to themself. When you think about it, the way the language works, it can be read either way. But I think in this case, from the context, it meant the former, in which case the response is not applicable, as one's colour being invisible to other whites does not entail its being invisible to non-whites.White people may be largely invisible to themselves in SOME parts of the Western world, but you try going to the Middle East and see how "invisible" to yourself you are there. — Agustino
No. One could argue that one of Buddhist tenets is that desire is the main source of suffering and the strategy of life ought to eliminate desire, which will eliminate suffering.As the Buddhists say, life is suffering — Agustino
LOL - most of Peterson's fans have already graduated college and are men who are struggling to find a job or fit in the workplace, or know what to do with their lives.Within 2 years, as Peterson's target audience graduates college and enters the work force, he'll become passé and fad into obscurity, and some other epigone takes his place. — Maw
The bourgeois are at the top because they have shown themselves to be the most competent at taking care of their society. In a way, excluding at the moment corruption, the way to get rich is by selling a lot of goods to a lot of people - which means adding value to the world, giving people what they want. — Agustino
Within 2 years, as Peterson's target audience graduates college and enters the work force, he'll become passé and fad into obscurity, and some other epigone takes his place. — Maw
Still waiting for Dr Peterson to come out with a written statement of his claims. It's hard to take claims seriously enough to bother spending the time listening to them if the claimant is not prepared to put them in writing. Especially when their day job is centred around putting ideas in writing in clear, cogent form. — andrewk
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.