They can be a source of meaning, or better, they are the meaning. The purpose is to learn to see more and more in them, appreciate them more and work with them in a better, less self-oriented way. If you take the dead view of analysis, they will appear as nothing to you on account of a bogus absolutist fantasy; because you will be demanding more than what is given, which is to say more than you are ready to receive.
It is simply a hopeless artificial situation to be putting yourself in of looking at life from the perspective of this deadening analysis; it is just not capable of leading to anything but nihilism and despair. There is nothing imperative or absolutely true in such a lifeless picture; it is something we do to ourselves, and not something inevitably done to us by life. — John
For example, some people find their pet worth living or dying for. But living for a pet is neither necessary nor sufficient for a good life. You could live and love your pet (or whatever) and find it just as significant, and your life just as meaningful, without the melodramatic act of ascribing all your life's worth on it. — jkop
What I live for encompasses innumerable things and activities, and is about contentedness, joy, and motivation, amongst other things. If these things were absent or unobtainable, then yes, I might conclude that I had nothing to live for. That's not melodramatic, it's reasonable. — Sapientia
Your problem is asking the question in the first place. Like the person who equates life only with happiness, you view living as a question of living "for a purpose." Lots of things happen in your life, but you only come away saying: "Is that it? I can't live just those small moments and be satisfied. — TheWillowOfDarkness
What's the purpose that will satisfy me?" What you seem to want (a purpose) is the very thing you deny is so (human life is just many different finite states) — TheWillowOfDarkness
Your OP says nothing about much of anything, >:O
"I'm afraid." Gee, that's great, man. Okay, what now? Who cares? — Heister Eggcart
This is the nihilism of purpose. An understanding which rejects the meaning of living a finite life for the notion some purpose must enter in from the outside and make things matter. With respect to living, it's self-defeating. It turns fulfilment and worth into an impossibility for your own life. Only the reductive fiction (purpose) can be worth anything. Life is just a nothingness to be ignored or miserably wallow in. — TheWillowOfDarkness
The only thing you say explicitly is that you live because you're afraid to die. Why is that? If you can't answer, then this excuse is as "irrational" as any other you machine gun mention. — Heister Eggcart
I don't think I understand that comment. "A genetic predisposition for survival in your thoughts" is confusing to me. And then I don't get how "your personal preferences over what you find fashionable" fits into the context of either my or your comment. — Terrapin Station
That's what you don't think. What you do think is..."It seems after some many years of analysis of this question that all I can rationally say is that I live only because I am afraid to die, like any other animal on earth." More simply put, your claim amounts to, "I live because I'm afraid," which in your eyes is a rational claim. Why? — Heister Eggcart
I disagree. We were born into existence, and it does contain harms and it contains a structure which we did not create. We all cope, that's just a truism, but that does not mean "and then it was good." — schopenhauer1
I didn't say it was rational — intrapersona
In fact that would be considered pre-rational and a matter of scientific fact. — intrapersona
This is correct, nothing does resolve the situation. You are stuck here until you're not. You will run into harm, you will create your own harm, you will find survival within your culture, you will experience boredom unless you create some sort of entertainment situation. — schopenhauer1
Yes you did - "It seems after some many years of analysis of this question that all I can rationally say is that I live only because I am afraid to die, like any other animal on earth." If it's irrational to be afraid of dying, then how do you find it possible to rationally think otherwise? — Heister Eggcart
How do you know that the chipmunk fears death if it is not a thinking, rational being? — Heister Eggcart
I say neither, because ascribing life's worth on something else is neither sufficient nor necessary to make it better. — jkop
I rationally concluded............ the the only rational conclusion is — intrapersona
that all animals have an IRRATIONAL fear of death. — intrapersona
Haha, seriously? I would think you would know better than to try and argue something like that. Just bring a flame thrower to it's lips... are you now going to argue that it will come closer and try to kiss the flame? right, keep going heister... keep going... haha — intrapersona
I don't fear death. — Heister Eggcart
Who are YOU though? — intrapersona
Do you also claim to have free will and have proof for it too? — intrapersona
Do you not get scared if someone holds a gun to your head? Maybe your not afraid of the concept of the death. — intrapersona
Anyway please keep this on subject. — intrapersona
Lol, What happens when the fetish goes stale?
It really doesn't though if you read my OP, fetish is like right pinky toe — intrapersona
if only for a little while. — Real Gone Cat
We don't really live for any particular reason. That we continue to live is more a side effect of satisfying our competing needs and desires (eg food water warmth). Living is the default state, so you don't need to come up with a reason to live, because it happens regardless. Your reasons have no bearing on whether you live or not. Let's say you decide your reason to live is to experience pleasure. If you change or stop this reason you don't just drop dead automatically.
A more relevant question is whether there is any reason to commit suicide. But even then, you don't just die when you come up with a reason(s), and you can suicide without a reason anyway.
Living is the default state, so you don't need a reason for it. Although a lot of people do seem to find it psychologically gratifying to feel as if they're living for some grand meaning or purpose. But then the question is not what's my reason for living, but rather what reason should I posit (for living) in order to psychologically gratify myself (and not, to actually live, because that happens anyway). — dukkha
That is the issue. How can transitory pleasure be a purpose if it is without meaning and doesn't stay consistent? — intrapersona
You are impossible to do philosophy with. — intrapersona
Not only are you subject to bigotry (not being able to see the other person's point of view because of your own desire to be right/close mindedness) — intrapersona
By proof of this, I — intrapersona
It is in accordance with what I said in my OP about how animals have no purpose in life other than to survive and not die because they are afraid to die. — intrapersona
How can transitory pleasure be a purpose if it is without meaning and doesn't stay consistent? — intrapersona
You are claiming that it is YOU who is choosing not to live "I don't have the slightest inclination or reason not to live as long as I possibly can." when in reality it IS YOUR SURVIVAL MECHANISM and not your personality, or your preferences over what you find fashionable (not talking about clothing here). — intrapersona
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.