And then it came to me, is everything we do geared towards survival? — leo
Are we nothing more than biological machines guided by feelings that tell them what to do to maximize their survival chances, spending their whole life attempting to maximize that function only to die in the end anyway? — leo
No, that'd be saying to much, even from an evolutionary perspective. That'd be claiming we are perfect survival machines, but we are not. — Echarmion
You can certainly put everything in that context. That is, essentially, what evolutionary psychology does. Doing so will provide you with some interesting perspectives on human behavior, for example the connection between altruism and survival. But it's still all based on a context, a perspective that you intentionally set up. You can choose other perspectives. — Echarmion
Some people also risk or sacrifice their own survival for what they describe as a ‘greater cause’ or ‘something larger than themselves’. — Possibility
Some people argue for multiculturalism based on reasoning such as ‘diversity makes the species stronger’, but deep down they want multiculturalism because it ‘feels right’ or because the alternative seems destructive, hateful or even fearful. — Possibility
Some people decide to share their life or dedicate it to others, not for procreative or even pragmatic reasons, but for ‘love’ or something similarly metaphysical. — Possibility
I think there is something ‘beyond survival’ that motivates us in many situations, especially once we have reached an awareness beyond the mere physicality of our existence. — Possibility
I agree, what I meant to say was, it seems as if everything we do is geared towards survival in some way, even though sometimes some act that would help us survive in one situation is actually detrimental in some other. — leo
I actually do not like that perspective, because it renders meaningless everything that had meaning to me, and I tried to get away from it, but what other perspective can we choose? Essentially all we do is spend our lives trying to survive better, we are driven by our feelings but our feelings drive us in that direction. — leo
People dedicate their lives to things whose end result is increasing survival chances for themselves or for those they deem to be like them. Some people will dedicate their lives looking for a cure for some disease, a feeling drives them, but the end result would be that someone they know or the species would survive better. Some will dedicate their lives for their children so their survival can be the most guaranteed possible. Some will dedicate their lives to understand the world, whose end result is being able to predict better to survive better. — leo
I'm desperately looking for another perspective, but if everything we do is linked to survival, what other perspective there is? — leo
When you look at the life of people who have done atrocities to others, there is always a story. The guy who killed a bunch of people in Christchurch felt they were a threat to the white race, to him and the people he deems to be like him. — leo
But there are clearly things like art that have no discernable value for the survival of the species. — Echarmion
But those aren't their actual motivations. Those are your interpretations. Someone who studies philosophy for the love of wisdom does not do so merely to survive. — Echarmion
work is done for survival — leo
tools helpful to survive — leo
When we do not work for basic survival — leo
because it helped our ancestors survive — leo
but why does it feel good? Isn't that simply because we know we can count on them if we need help? — leo
Indeed, they aren't doing it consciously for survival, they are doing it for the feeling it brings them, what I am saying is that it seems the feeling is there in the first place because the feeling is helpful to survive. The love of wisdom is the desire to understand things, but where does that desire come from if not from the fact that the desire to understand helps us survive through its effects? — leo
Love is seen as that powerful and mysterious thing, but don't people fall in love simply when they see in the other someone who could 'complete' them, when they subconsciously evaluate that the other has abilities or characteristics that would be a good complementary fit to survive better together, or characteristics that would make their children good at surviving?
As to the people who feel unconditional love for all other humans, don't they feel that way simply because they have realized that if we all cared for each other and helped each other we would survive better than if we fought against each other? That fighting violence with violence only creates more violence, and caring for others unconditionally is the only way to make it disappear. — leo
I used to see feelings and imagination as proof that we are more than physical beings, than biological machines, but if all our feelings are geared towards survival then what evidence is there of the 'beyond'? — leo
Secondly, even if we were to assume all our feelings were forged out of necessity to survive, that wouldn't invalidate them as feelings. The actual feelings and motivations of people are still real experiences. There is no justification to treat this as mere charade or illusion. — Echarmion
I have treated many hundreds of patients. Among those in the second half of life - that is to say, over 35 - there has not been one whose problem in the last resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life. It is safe to say that every one of them fell ill because he had lost that which the living religions of every age have given their followers, and none of them has really been healed who did not regain his religious outlook.
It is as if there was no meaning to everything we feel other than the fact it has been helpful for us to survive, as if feelings and beliefs were just another traits selected through competitive evolution, with only those who have feelings and beliefs useful for survival who get to live and reproduce, and all the others who get to die. I guess there is a reason most people don't think too much, because when they do it doesn't tend to end well for them. — leo
Is there any example where that greater cause isn't aimed at making others survive better? — leo
I have treated many hundreds of patients. Among those in the second half of life - that is to say, over 35 - there has not been one whose problem in the last resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life. It is safe to say that every one of them fell ill because he had lost that which the living religions of every age have given their followers, and none of them has really been healed who did not regain his religious outlook. — Wayfarer
Yes and no, is my answer. Yes because we have instincts, same as animals. No, because we sometimes focus on pleasure instead of survival. Is riding on that roller coaster good for you? No, it decreases you chances of survival or yes, it feels amazing and I want to go on it again. Get the drift? — OpinionsMatter
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.