A striking resemblance, no?
— TheMadFool
Oh, indeed - has the penny dropped? — Banno
If meaning is use, then the meaning of your life is what you do. — Banno
...religion provided one of the most satisfying answers to that existential query.
— TheMadFool
Well, I won't agree with that. Religion perhaps provides a cookie-cutter replacement for meaning. It's for folk who want a prefabricated answer, one that avoids having to be critical or think for oneself. that may be satisfactory for you, but not for me. — Banno
This idea seems important to you. You already know I disagree with your choices. But I will ask you, what does it mean? — Tom Storm
The point I am making is that gods and religions continue to have a hold on much human behaviour, choices, politics, culture and wars, regardless of what a few academics think. — Tom Storm
All I can say is religion, since it's essentially cosmic in proportion and scale, provides the greatest meaning a life could have. What better way to purpose one's life than by contributing to, in some way, the universe itself and God it's creator? It doesn't get bigger than that, right — TheMadFool
The theme is pretty expressly that “religion” is the proper term to describe a language community engaged in meaning creation regarding issues of ultimate concern. — Ennui Elucidator
What better way to purpose one's life than by contributing to, in some way, the universe itself and God it's creator? — TheMadFool
More precisely, meaning is use within a language game by players in a community (i.e. form of life).Ludwig Wittgenstein was of the opinion that meaning is use. — TheMadFool
Religion, n. A flock of sheep bound into a community (by imaginary fears & hopes) in order to facilitate fleecing by (a) shepherd(s).Sure, treat religion as a form of life; then what it means is what it does.
Which in the main is fleecing the sheep. — Banno
From devout belief (onwards and then back) to make believe ... which Žizek calls "the sublime object of ideology".If god is dead and religion is god talk, I don’t see where we are going. — Ennui Elucidator
It's undead. Like "spiritual, but not religious" – animated, but not alive.As for god being dead, whence god? — Ennui Elucidator
(See my replay to Ennui just before this one.)So the right question (as far as I can tell) is how is it that the gods survive alleged secularism? — Tom Storm
Ludwig Wittgenstein was of the opinion that meaning is use. :chin:
— TheMadFool
More precisely, meaning is use within a language game by players in a community (i.e. form of life). — 180 Proof
Religion, n. A flock of sheep bound into a community (by imaginary fears & hopes) in order to facilitate fleecing by (a) shepherd(s). — 180 Proof
The overlap with faith out be apparent; faith is belief despite the facts. Hence faith is the very stuff of ideology....which Žizek calls "the sublime object of ideology". — 180 Proof
My bad for the misunderstanding apparent. Religion, insofar as what I said earlier matters, stands for what seems to be missing in non-religious worldviews - that yearning to be part of something bigger as some like to put it. The closest such concepts free of religious baggage I can find are ecological movements and Niel deGrasse Tyson's Comsic Perspective. — TheMadFool
The Pope and an atheist are having a discussion...
and it slowly gets more and more heated until eventually the Pope can't take it anymore and he says to the atheist - "You are like a man who is blindfolded, in a dark room who is looking for a black cat that isn't there."
The atheist laughs and says - "With all due respect, we sound awfully similar. You are like a man who is blindfolded, in a dark room who is looking for a black cat that isn't there but the difference is you think you've found it.
Read the opening of the PI where Witty explicitly rejects "the more widely held" (Adamic / Augustinian) "essence of words" and thereby investigates 'usage-meaning' instead. "Use" is the broad alternative to the very narrow scope of "essence" and is not "auxiliary" as far as Witty is concerned.I was wondering about the possibility of Wittgenstein's theory of meaning as use being an auxiliary to the more widely held belief of meaning as tied to the notion of an essence to words. — TheMadFool
Read the opening of PI where he explicitly rejects "the more widely held" (Adamic / Augustinian) "essence of words" and thereby investigates 'usage-meaning' instead. "Use" is the broad alternative to the very narrow scope of "essence" and is not "auxiliary" as far as Witty is concerned. — 180 Proof
Don't mistake silence for absence. The secular world if full of nods and winks towards what we might call the numinous. The difference is not making claims to knowledge.
Puts me in mind of the Dave Allan joke:
The Pope and an atheist are having a discussion...
and it slowly gets more and more heated until eventually the Pope can't take it anymore and he says to the atheist - "You are like a man who is blindfolded, in a dark room who is looking for a black cat that isn't there."
The atheist laughs and says - "With all due respect, we sound awfully similar. You are like a man who is blindfolded, in a dark room who is looking for a black cat that isn't there but the difference is you think you've found it. — Banno
Then that's Wittgenstein's problem, no? To have multiple referents doesn't imply that there are no referents - the arbitrary nature of how we assign meaning to words doesn't imply no essence was/is implied. — TheMadFool
My hunch is Wittgenstein conflates the abscence of a single referent for a word with no referent for that word. — TheMadFool
Read Witty's PI, Fool (at least the first half of it). — 180 Proof
My bad for the misunderstanding apparent. Religion, insofar as what I said earlier matters, stands for what seems to be missing in non-religious worldviews - that yearning to be part of something bigger as some like to put it. The closest such concepts free of religious baggage I can find are ecological movements and Niel deGrasse Tyson's Comsic Perspective. — TheMadFool
...and we were so close... — Banno
I don't know what it is but my gut instincts tell me that Wittgenstein's wrong. — TheMadFool
My bad for the misunderstanding apparent. Religion, insofar as what I said earlier matters, stands for what seems to be missing in non-religious worldviews - that yearning to be part of something bigger as some like to put it. The closest such concepts free of religious baggage I can find are ecological movements and Niel deGrasse Tyson's Comsic Perspective.
— TheMadFool
Yearning to be part of something bigger? Dunno bout them but Prishon donot wanna be part of bigger thing. Prishon wonders how all to be came!
Neil deGrasse free of religious bagage? His whole being IS the bagage he must carry everyday like a burden... like Jesus had to carry that Godd":$#d cross of his!
Sorry for noticing a spelling mistake, but is deGrasse comsic? Sick about his own com? — Prishon
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.