That is the issue. How can transitory pleasure be a purpose if it is without meaning and doesn't stay consistent? — 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
It's quite simple, an absence of anything, everything. There are no bananas or thingamajig, it's quite simple. In fact it couldn't be simpler.
— Punshhh
Don't you see though that they are one and the same thing? You don't KNOW what an absence of anything is because you can't ever experience it. It is simple because you just aren't looking at it deeply enough.
I have given purpose a lot of thought and have concluded that the answer is for humanity to secure its long term survival with a healthy social culture, which manages the planetary resources sustainably and cares for and maintains the biosphere. Is that not a worthy purpose?
— Punshhh
That purpose is the same as I stated in my OP, just to keep surviving and not die like all other animals. That is not a purpose, that is an instinct.
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.
there is no objective measure even of what life is, let alone of what it is worth
I am not talking about the meaning of life here but a purpose that sustains one from avoiding inevitable death — intrapersona
The very nature of a "good life" entails a purpose. If you don't think it does... THEN LIST WHY NOT! — intrapersona
Then obviously you didn't read my OP — intrapersona
I live for mostly hedonistic reasons. Do you want a list, or...?
It's irrational to dismiss that just because it is temporary. That it is temporary is inconsequential. For me, at least. — Sapientia
There are some fleeting moments of joy and beauty that I can capture but it is foolish to live FOR those moments exclusively because they are transitory and fleeting, nor do they actually give any more purpose to one's life, it just makes life more "exciting". — intrapersona
And your not wanting to die right now is the same as saying you don't want to die. — intrapersona
Because in the future it is very likely that you will not want to die then either. — intrapersona
Like the procrastinator who keeps putting of cleaning his room by saying "I will clean my room, just not now". It is a psychological coping mechanism, be aware of it! — intrapersona
People live good lives regardless of whether they live for something or nothing. A good life doesn't suddenly arise from having something to live for. Nor would the lack of something to live for imply a bad life. — jkop
Are you sure of that? How do you know you weren't an mystical energy being who at the time of transference had all of it's memories temporarily disabled.
My point is that you can't know that for certain. I am so sick of foolish people inferring concrete absolutes about states they know NOTHING of, your as bad as a christian ffs. You don't KNOW what it was like before death, therefor don't say it was nothing... all you can say about it is that you don't know and you don't remember, but it could be something and it could be nothing. — intrapersona
You're misunderstanding if you think I have said that life is all positive, just a bed of roses with no thorns. Living fully, though, is not a matter of merely coping. Whether you see life as predominately good or bad is always up to you and is a function of your thinking; there is no objective measure even of what life is, let alone of what it is worth. — John
Ok, I see what you are saying. I meditate so I can see directly that when thought stops contentment arises and that is the lowest possible energy state of the complete system (the brain). But probably the lowest energy state is sleep or death. and harmony acts but doesn't reason, if it didn't how could harmony exist? Harmony needs action in order for it to exist. Where is the harmony in a completely still nothing?
I don't see how you got "to be or not to be is not worth considering" from "Socrates said death may be the greatest of all blessings." How does all of this making to be or not to be is not worth considering? Because I would be so content that it wouldn't matter? AKA: — intrapersona
I look at it like, purposes only apply to individual ends and aims. I eat because it am hungry, find warmth because I'm cold, do activities because I'm bored, drink because I'm an alcoholic :), drive my car because I want to go somewhere, etc. I don't think you can combine all these separate purposes for separate actions, under an overall umbrella purpose. So that you eat because you're hungry, and drink because you're thirsty, and yet you both eat and drink because of a larger overall purpose like say living for god, experiencing pleasure, improving the world, whatever purpose you pick. It's like doing something for one reason, and yet you're *really* doing something for another reason. — dukkha
Hmmm, okay--still not sure I get that, though. For one, it doesn't make any sense to me to suppose that "I" am somehow different than something like a "survival mechanism" built into me. "I" am simply the totality of my body, and in terms of consciousness, including personality, particular brain states (which are dynamic). Something like a "survival mechanism" would also be just a factor of how my body, including my brain, happens to be constructed/happens to function, hence that "survival mechanism" would be identical to (a part of) me. — Terrapin Station
When I say that "I don't have the slightest inclination . . ." I'm simply noting that thoughts questioning whether I should continue to live don't at all occur to me, and when someone like yourself suggests that they should, it just strikes me as absurd to even consider that it would be a worthwhile thing to ponder. — Terrapin Station
Purposes are necessarily present to consciousness. They do not exist otherwise. So both human and non-human animals only have purposes insofar as those are explicitly present to consciousness. That's not to deny that a lot of behavioral tendencies are evolutionarily selected for because they make survival until the possibility of procreation more likely--and that's simply because contrary tendencies are not as likely to be genetically passed on, because the potential parent creatures are less likely to survive to procreate when those characteristics obtain, but it would be misconceived to identify that fact with a "purpose." — Terrapin Station
Fear likewise only obtains when it's present to consciousness. — Terrapin Station
because it might well be the case following death, so it is potentially an option for action in life, just take an overdose and you're there, in a state of absolute nonexistence, the purpose is then clear, there is none. — Punshhh
if they have agency they are at liberty to persue purposes, they have purpose — Punshhh
This is a conflation between instinct and intellectual strategic action. Also you have ignored my classification of purposes. It's almost as though you are not interested in discussing purpose. — Punshhh
So are you going now to appeal to the second category of purposes, those in reference to any agency, or process resulting in the existence of this whole world we find ourselves in? Because this seems to be what you are looking towards in the OP. — Punshhh
Living fully, though, is not a matter of merely coping. Whether you see life as predominately good or bad is always up to you and is a function of your thinking; there is no objective measure even of what life is, let alone of what it is worth. — John
I am not talking about the meaning of life here but a purpose that sustains one from avoiding inevitable death
— intrapersona
Can you explain the difference for me? It certainly seems that one sustains oneself with the purpose to avoid death, and that death is inevitable, yet you seem to want another purpose for sustaining life. Well I offer the purpose of overcoming one's need to sustain oneself, one's need for the the personal continuation that then requires in turn a purpose.
Death is inevitable for physical beings, but it has no significance except to that which sustains itself. Self has no purpose, it is unnecessary and harmful to life. So life's purpose is to end self before death ends life. — unenlightened
People live good lives regardless of whether they live for something or nothing. A good life doesn't suddenly arise from having something to live for. Nor would the lack of something to live for imply a bad life. — jkop
You could scrap some stuff, but just having the highlights would seem to be lacking something valuable and important. — Sapientia
I didn't regurgitate what you said word for word, but I don't think that it's too far off. But perhaps I misunderstood.
I don't live exclusively for those moments, like I said, so that criticism doesn't apply to me. How many people do? They might say that they live for those moments when asked what they live for, but I think that people just tend to mention the highlights. Whereas, if they gave it enough thought, they would realise that the "whole package" - highlights included - very much matters. You could scrap some stuff, but just having the highlights would seem to be lacking something valuable and important.
I think the fact that such moments are temporary (or, in your words, transitory and fleeting) doesn't really come into it - except as one of the reasons that they're actually worthwhile.
And I think you're wrong when you say that they don't give any more purpose to one's life, but just make life more "exciting". They can do, and actually do in some cases, and you can lose the scare quotes from around the word "exciting". — Sapientia
For me the point is to live a life "with heart"; meaning to live in ways that cultivate those things which are the most important to you. What is most important to you, though, is not something that may be coldly calculated, but something that must be felt. The way I see it, things are purposeless if they do not touch your emotions; that is if you don't feel them. What, for example, would be the point of marrying someone if you felt no love for them? Or paying lip-service to some religion or other if it really meant nothing to you; if it didn't inspire any feelings of transcendence or love in you? — John
I don't feel like saying much else about your OP. I disagree with the gist of it, and I think your comparison of happiness with your "pinky toe" is rather silly, and shouldn't be taken seriously. — Sapientia
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.