S: U.G. Krishnamurti

A: Lao Tze

B: Ludwig Wittgenstein

C: Murray Rothbard

D: Buddha

E: John Locke

F: Jiddu Krishnamurti

(very few philosophers on my list but wth)

From childhood to year 19 all I asked was "how?"; I was only interested in the natural sciences. Then I met a person, he called himself an existentialist.
From that day I was cursed by "why?".

After 33 years of looking for answers, God, enlightenment, it suddenly ended. This should not peak your interest since I don't know how. I know it preceded by a few intense days of thoughts like "there's nothing I can do, thinking cannot solve the problem, whatever I do just aggrevates the problem, there's absolutely nothing I can do to solve this".

Then on June 24 2020 it was gone. I wrote "The End of the Search!" in my diary.

The search is still gone and philosophical thinking and ideas are a minor side interest today.

I feel kind of empty but in a neutral way, sort of vacant but mentally very alert. It's only been less than two month so I'll probably find a way back to the curse of "WHY?!".

If there is no afterlife can we assume life had no meaning? — TiredThinker

An afterlife would require that your experience machine (thoughts, feelings, perception) would somehow exist separate from the nervous system, which to me seems impossible.

Why not ask the same questions about the universe or other things? — Wheatley

Some molecules began to make copies of themselves. The race for survival and reproduction began on this particular planet, and it's still going on. What's the purpose of a worm in the ground?

Life obviously has no meaning whatsoever. Life will flourish wherever there's fertile soil, but it's indifferent to the opinions, suffering and pleasures of its creations, whether it's worms or primates.

Nothing in nature claims to be apart from everything except the human Self. It says "I am separated from the whole, I live here in my myself-bubble. I'm not even one with this body I'm inhabiting".
We may claim that we are all one but we don't (and we can't) experience oneness.

I don't think there's anything metaphysically wrong with the universe, rather the problem is the "I", the thinker and it's thoughts.

When there's no thinking there can be no problems. Nothing says "I am here now but one day I'll be gone". In between two thoughts there's no problem.

Can the Self be a product of human culture? Much like a few hundred years ago when basically everybody believed in God. Since you grew up surrounded by people constantly referring to this "God", he became "real".
The present day child has first no notion of a self, of a me, that is taught by repeatedly pointing and saying things like "yes you did that John!", "this is your teddy bear" and so on, repeatedly referring to the child's Self. Still it takes years until the child have self-produced thoughts (a Self).

So maybe the gurus are right, the self is an illusion?

(wow, this got off the track, sorry.)

Why would a moderator have opinions about a post? As long as the site rules are followed that should be it.
I agree with the move to The Lounge but after that all you should do is defend that move.

Describing Heaven as an unspecified awesome place is very clever from a PR standpoint.
It lets peoples imagination fill in the blanks.

So what can we learn? Wanna lure people in, be vague. Wanna scare people off, be specific.

If there's no thoughts there's no way of knowing if you're conscious or not. The only way to know is if your thinking print out "yeah, I'm conscious".
Consciousness as some kind of mishmash of thinking/infinite pure backdrop/awareness etc is just a myth.

You wont die. You will only live. You can't experience death much like you can't see beyond your visual field.
So for you, death wont come, but I think you agree.

You don't need a reason to live, you need a reason to end it.
A rational reason to end your life is when your total estimated suffering outweighs your total estimated enjoyment.

Life has no purpose whatsoever, it's just an expression of the natural laws.
But if you think life is pointless, let's turn to Death - the Grandmaster of Utterly Pointlessness.

Life is something, death is not.

Unfortunately we first have to define consciousness. Sorry.

I feel as if the term should be peace, not happiness — Dylan Law

I agree.

One of my stepping stones to a harmonious life is the realization there's no death for me.
In all objective meaning, I will die, but I will never be able to experience death.
This realization (or "belief" if you will) came to me after receiving general anaesthetic for surgery.

Afterwards I couldn't recollect any time, space, activity during my unconsciousness how hard I tried.
It was just as if you cut away an hour from a film. And isn't death just permanent unconsciousness?

We "dramatize" death a lot; "I will not be able to be with my loved ones" etc, etc.
You will not be there, much like you're not there in between two thoughts.

“Death is not an event in life: we do not live to experience death. If we take eternity to mean not infinite temporal duration but timelessness, then eternal life belongs to those who live in the present. Our life has no end in the way in which our visual field has no limits.”

- Ludwig Wittgenstein

(just a side note, "embracing death" shows great passion, which would be a very alien notion for a nihilist :D)

I fail to see the depth of this puzzle.

“Why is it absurd for me to say something true about myself?”

From MacIntosh view it's not true. It's as if Richard Dawkins would say "God exists, but I don't believe in God".

The only absurdity here is the construction of the sentence “It’s raining, but I don’t believe it is”.
And we all know you can conjure up many word-based paradoxes.

The electrochemical process take up space much like the electrical grid in your home. It produces heat, light and can be transformed into mechanical energy for appliances (brain activities).

When there's no power to the grid the output stops and the question "where does it goes?" becomes pointless; we don't ask "where does the activity of our vacuum cleaner goes when we pull the plug?".

Neurological processes obviously take up space so that's not your question.

A more interesting question would be; is the thinker-thought pair / the self / the one claiming "I exist" totally dependent on the physiological electrochemical processes in the brain or not?

I would say it is and so the mind does occupy space (and also vanish when the body stops working i.e. dies).

"The right thing to do is what makes us feel good [...]"

Morality are rules of social interactions for all members of the group and for all times.

I assume by "group" you mean the world.

So if we are talking about morally good behavior for the world we must talk about what's always good, so it can't be based on temporarily changing feelings and/or emotions.

The statement "The right thing to do is what makes us feel good [...]" is thus immoral.