The purpose of life

General philosophy discussions. If you are not sure where to place your thread, please post it here. Share favorite quotes, discuss philosophers, and other topics.

Re: The purpose of life

Postby charon on May 10th, 2012, 5:14 am 

BadgerJelly

That wasn't very long!

I'll wait till you answer the second one otherwise we'll be cross-posting.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1671
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: The purpose of life

Postby BadgerJelly on May 10th, 2012, 5:32 am 

Since we're supposed to be discussing the purpose of life, is that a concept?


Yes as is life itself. Thinking of life in this way though generally scares people in my experience because they see no sense in thinking in this manner.


I would say it was. After all, it's certainly not an undisputed fact. If it was this thread wouldn't have gone on for 5 pages!


The purpose is what we make it. It is the commonality that holds the purpose not the individual purpose.


If it is a concept why has it arisen? I'd say, fairly obviously, it's arisen because we don't know what life is for. We're confused about the whole thing and ask what the point of it all is.


THIS is what got me excited! It has arisen because it is the mechanism of nature. I am not confused by life but I don't know what it is. They are two different things completely.

To go into depth on why we are asking this in the first place is the correct place to start from I believe. The answer is pretty obvious to this. It has arisen because we ask it. Then to ask why we ask it we have to ask many more questions that lead to many more questions.

To start if we are asking it what are we? What are humans? Where have we come from? Science can step in here and answer these questions for us fairly accurately in terms of biological evolution. We then have to discuss our environment both physical and the mental constructs. What are rivers for? What are fish for? what are stars for? Again with all these questions we cannot answer them only elude to the mechanism of them for a better overall understanding. We know rivers exist due to the mechanisms of gravity, electromagnetism, thermodynamics etc.. What these are we have no idea we just know what they do but not why.

This is the purpose. To question. What you needs to be seen though is that question is a concept that is nature. Nature is almost like the question of itself and this is undeniable because we are in fact a construct of nature in conceptual way we are a concept of nature and we are it too. This is why many peoples heads hurt because they are trying to understand themselves by their environment without realising the environment is actually them.


Next question: why are we confused? Do facts produce confusion? Or is it ideas which produce confusion?


The "facts" you are referring to merely produce more questions and those questions produce more questions again because that is the purpose of nature.
Confusion arises because we hit a dead end of questioning and cannot ask any more, more often than not due to fear of damaged ego's, insanity or simply rocking the boat.

Human facts or ideas cause human confusion? I really like this line of questioning :)

Another question here could be is our purpose to be confused? Obviously in a sense it has to be if we generally are. We make the facts and ideas through our conceptualisation of nature (that includes ourselves remember) and we also make confusion. We seem, for the most part, incapable of ignoring confusion completely and this is how we survive. This is the nature of existence but is not so easily seen in the inorganic because its too far removed from the concept we have constructed of life in meaning only biological life.

As you like science "facts" as much as I do then you can see the fact is biological life exists because of inorganic life. We exist because of the laws of nature we see around us from the quantum to the astronomical, from finite to finite and infinite to infinite.

I think the questions we ask and the ideas we have also confuse because they make us realise the more we seem to understand nature the more clear our own ignorance becomes. Its like climbing the peak of a mountain to see what is on the other side and all you see is more and more mountains. Some people stop and enjoy the view other explore the next mountain. Those that stop still explore though just in not such an obvious manner.

If we just stuck to facts, daily realities, is there confusion? What is there to be confused about? It's when we leave facts and go off into ideas that the confusion starts. Isn't that true?


If we never questioned anything there would be no confusion. Also we wouldn't actually exist if we could not learn and our nature is nature so how do you repress the irrepressible? That is some question pretty much like how do you eat yourself :P
If you believe we have the freewill to dispute our nature then you admit to a lack of freewill and therefore end up back to square one.


Our hopeless confusion is in our own minds, our own thinking. It's not 'out there'.


Well if you believe in God then you can think this. If you do not and believe us to be seperate from nature you in are pretty much saying the same thing. This comes back to the question of is your hand YOUR hand? Working of science facts there is no difference to "out there" than "in here". It is certainly an interesting view to take but is does eventually revolve around to the same natural conclusion as there is only nature to conclude with ... that said there are many aspects of nature we are yet to reveal and it could well be that somehow or someway we are not of nature. In which case my entire line of thinking is redundant when referring to the perceived physical/energetic forms of nature.


Is there confusion in escape? If we stick to fact, to what actually is, is there confusion? But when we escape from facts there's confusion. Confusion means choice, not seeing clearly, having to decide between things. Desire creates confusion. The moment I want something confusion begins. There's confusion when I want to change something into something else of my own desiring.


I do struggle with your use of the word fact. Quantum mechanics is a fact and is also extremely confusing just as much as gravity and matter/energy because we don't actually KNOW what they are.

Anyway I will take this to mean "daily life" again. This one confuses me :S

I just do not see how human life can exist without the illusion/reality of choice. I think the escape you are referring to would have to be death which you mention later ...


Now if there's no confusion at all, and we look at life, has it a purpose? What do we mean by life? Just breathing in and out or the whole phenomenon of existence?


I feel the need to delve into your line of thinking involving confusion. A good point to consider is that our "ration", right sided, brain is opposed by our "irrational", left sided, brain. I will have to see if anyone has been born with only a irrational sided brain or the opposite ... it must have happened unless nature does not work in this manner in which case that would throw your line of thinking into the sidelines.

Assuming it is possible to have ZERO confusion what would be the repercussions? No freewill, no development, no emotions etc.. Basically a robotic existence with no thought or consciousness. Really not even a robotic existence really just an existence of a stone.

I do see the whole phenomenon of existence as life. A stone is a life because it is part of nature as is everything and nothing. This is where I personally struggle to express my concept of reality.


Life is everything, right? Not just the natural world but our own human life with its miseries and joys, sufferings and pleasures. And also there is death which is part of life.


Yep! :) Life is also nothing obviously.


If we look at that without any escape, without any desire to change it, has it a purpose? An actual purpose, not invented by us, not put into our minds by someone.


Yes because we are a tendril of life (nature). We are it and it is us so what we are is what it is. The purpose is the question. The beauty is in the journey, so to speak, not the arrival. Really do we ever arrive? Yet again we have the concept so maybe there is a fuller purpose than just to question and if we question and nature is the questioning mechanism to what end?


What do you say? It's very difficult to look that way, isn't it? It's very hard to look without imposing our ideas or wants on what is there. But that's what we have to do to discover the truth of the question.


It is fascinating. Curiosity and intrigue are easy and effortless if you open up to them.

The only consistent mechanism I see in the universe/nature/life (whatever you want to call it) is communication/interaction with the inevitable conclusions of diversity over simplicity and both being of the same thing merely interpreted uniquely by our human conceptualisations of the reality we are faced with.

Everything "communicates" because existence is communication. To what end? THAT is the beauty and reason for life/nature/universe. To find out.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5570
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: The purpose of life

Postby Whut on May 10th, 2012, 6:29 am 

A good point to consider is that our "ration", right sided, brain is opposed by our "irrational", left sided, brain.


Just a quibble, but want to point out that we actually use both sides for proper rational thinking or imaginitive thinking ect. There is a difference between the two sides though; the best way I've heard it described is that our left brain is more specific, and interested in distilled facts so to speak; but ultimately gives a "lifeless" view. The right brain is more holistic, interested in a big picture, and how everything relates to each other. An interesting way of looking at society allegorically is like a big brain. Western collective worldview /understanding /culture started out pretty balanced between "right" and "left," but over time the "left" seems to have become dominent.

Relevant cheesy quote from Einstein: “The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.”

Also, this left right distinction may relate to earlier points raised about concepts ect..

Usually it's a dichotomy between perception and conception. As charon pointed out we don't concieve of rain, we percieve it. Concepts I think then are a sort of filling in the gaps between percieved information in some way. We percieve rain but then come up with concepts of how rain forms and falls ect. based on related information we have also percieved. So perhaps in a way, our right brain deals more with conceptions and our left brain more with perceptions. (in a very very general way)

But like most dualities or dichotomies it's hard or perhaps impossible to draw a distinct line between the two; and so in reality it's more like a continuum between conception and perception. Some people, I'm sure, might even hold that ultimately all perceptions are actually still a type of conception, which I think is something Badger has pointed out. It's just useful to model it as a dichotomy, in the same way it is with hot and cold, or good and bad ect.
Whut
Active Member
 
Posts: 1063
Joined: 10 Sep 2010


Re: The purpose of life

Postby Whut on May 10th, 2012, 7:19 am 

Whut wrote:Some other popular answers to the question are things like:
...
> 42!


Someone pointed out to me recently that 42 upside down is "2b"; or "To be." x)
Whut
Active Member
 
Posts: 1063
Joined: 10 Sep 2010


Re: The purpose of life

Postby charon on May 10th, 2012, 8:30 am 

BadgerJelly

Ok, that was long!

I'll have to take the salient points otherwise we'll go on too long. If I miss anything let me know :)

1st post.

The hardest trick is learning how to stop filtering and deconstruct our concepts to see the raw data and obtain a different point of view to compare to our own prefiltered perceptions


Yes, I think that's the point, to be free of our own concepts about something and see that thing 'as is'.

I can make a concept about almost anything but my concept is not that thing. I think we understand that therefore why not put aside the concept and simply look? If I'm aware that I have a concept and that the concept is not the thing or the person then I can put it aside, surely?

The ideologies formed in humanity through the concepts of religion/politics/science have given rise to greater diversity and interactions


Yes, ideologies proliferate but what have they produced? Have they brought about a better world? Or have they only divided us and brought conflict?

I don't know why we bother with ideologies at all. Political activity in accordance with an ideology is mere conformity. It is imposing an idea on something living thus inevitably it becomes repressive, ugly, violent. Ideas only create counter-ideas, they never bring peace.

2nd post

Yes as is life itself. Thinking of life in this way though generally scares people in my experience because they see no sense in thinking in this manner


I don't know why you say life is a concept. It's not, it's a reality!

The purpose is what we make it


I know, but why do we make it? Is it because we feel living is pointless? It's not, it depends how we live. If we live wrongly then obviously there's a sense of pointlessness. Right living is its own point.

I am not confused by life but I don't know what it is. They are two different things completely


What is life? Get up, work or no work, entertainment, sleep, etc... and also all the problems we have. We're confused by all that because we don't understand ourselves. When the mind is clear then life is clear, then one can go much deeper.

what are we? What are humans? Where have we come from? Science can step in here and answer these questions for us fairly accurately in terms of biological evolution


Science, as you say, answers in biological terms but that is only partly what we are. We are what our consciousness is, which is essentially knowledge.

This is the purpose. To question


Absolutely.

they are trying to understand themselves by their environment without realising the environment is actually them


Precisely, but I wonder if we really see that? We are the product of the environment, the social influences and beyond that the natural world. We are that.

If we never questioned anything there would be no confusion


I think it depends how we question. One can question only verbally, intellectually, and get lost in it but I wouldn't call that questioning. Real questioning is a state of mind that is watching, learning, inquiring all the time.

it could well be that somehow or someway we are not of nature. In which case my entire line of thinking is redundant when referring to the perceived physical/energetic forms of nature


What do you mean by nature? Just the backdrop of the earth, wildlife, and so on? We're certainly of nature physically. We've evolved over centuries to what we are now but there's more to us than the physical. There's the whole of our consciousness to consider.

I do struggle with your use of the word fact


I just mean something which is actually there, not invented or imagined. Rain is a fact, war is a fact, our thoughts are a fact. The man in the moon is not a fact - unfortunately, because it's rather nice :)

Assuming it is possible to have ZERO confusion what would be the repercussions? No freewill, no development, no emotions etc.. Basically a robotic existence with no thought or consciousness. Really not even a robotic existence really just an existence of a stone


If we had no confusion there'd be real clarity and the seeing of things as they are. Also we'd have immense energy because the mind would not be diffused or caught in illusion.

The beauty is in the journey, so to speak, not the arrival


Absolutely. That's why I question this whole need of 'purpose'. Purpose implies a goal, an arrival, whereas the journeying is its own purpose. The meaning is in the thing itself, not away from it.

A mind that is confused, seeking, needing a purpose, creating goals for itself, is always agitated; there's no end to its movement. It can question endlessly and the more it questions the more there is, a vast ocean of endless words. There's no end to that and it's ultimately futile. Not that one shouldn't question but there must also be an end to it. In silence there is truth.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1671
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: The purpose of life

Postby BadgerJelly on May 10th, 2012, 1:44 pm 

Whut wrote:
Whut wrote:Some other popular answers to the question are things like:
...
> 42!


Someone pointed out to me recently that 42 upside down is "2b"; or "To be." x)


In essence this is what I am saying. How you arrive at this conclusion is the profound life changing thing though otherwise it is like discovering what a mobile phone does without knowing how it does it.

And that can be referred to this :

Some people, I'm sure, might even hold that ultimately all perceptions are actually still a type of conception, which I think is something Badger has pointed out. It's just useful to model it as a dichotomy, in the same way it is with hot and cold, or good and bad ect.


It is useful but it is not the point of the investigation. Some people may chose one side or another and some may sit on the fence. I chose to simply remove the fence we put it place to try and understand the subject better.

Charon >

I thought it was clear that I mean nature as everything .. hence nature/universe/life.

Yes, ideologies proliferate but what have they produced? Have they brought about a better world? Or have they only divided us and brought conflict?

I don't know why we bother with ideologies at all. Political activity in accordance with an ideology is mere conformity. It is imposing an idea on something living thus inevitably it becomes repressive, ugly, violent. Ideas only create counter-ideas, they never bring peace.


Ideologies bring diversity. Without them their would only be a sense of "me" not a sense of "us". There would be no individuals and no advancement in understanding. Everything would be vapid can you not see that? Without interaction right up from the subatomic level to the human level there wouldn't "be".

If you want peace either be open to understand at any cost or be ignorant and deluded. The choice is yours. Unfortunately too many people seem blind to this or shy away in fear of their own possible worthlessness.

Without opposition "we" are not.

I don't know why you say life is a concept. It's not, it's a reality!


Ok then what is reality if not a construct of concepts? Whut has hit what I am saying well enough.

I know, but why do we make it?
- in reference to my "purpose is what we make it"

You are thinking about answering this question from a biased human view. My reference was to nature and the purpose being natures purpose not ours (but we are nature so it is ours directly and indirectly). We are just constructs made within nature to conceptualise ourselves in a diverse number of possibilities that the laws of nature allows. Without the laws of nature such as gravity we could not exist.

tbh this was a point that drove me crazy for a long time until I gave up and the answers came flooding and opened up reality to me. We are in a sense the purpose of life just as everything living is. We are just an inevitable possibility but what our resulting end is doesn't even matter. The delusion of ego only makes "us" but we are essential because we are ... I wish I could use telepathy sometimes :(

Science, as you say, answers in biological terms but that is only partly what we are. We are what our consciousness is, which is essentially knowledge.


What does this mean? Do you believe that our consciousness is somehow separate from nature? from existence? from life? from the universe? Do you believe in God or the mechanisms of nature?

People struggle with defining consciousness. For me it is pretty simple. It is just the mechanism of nature that produces concepts. It is not a very in depth definition on the surface but it is only the surface. Where consciousness arises from is a different subject though ... which again leads to communication/interaction through greater diversity.

I think it depends how we question. One can question only verbally, intellectually, and get lost in it but I wouldn't call that questioning. Real questioning is a state of mind that is watching, learning, inquiring all the time.


I would. Not much more I can add to that. You cannot question without being confounded by something or you wouldn't question it? Your statement makes no sense to me. Confusion is a product of trying to understand. You take away confusion then you take away the ability to understand anything new.

I do struggle with your use of the word fact


I just mean something which is actually there, not invented or imagined. Rain is a fact, war is a fact, our thoughts are a fact. The man in the moon is not a fact - unfortunately, because it's rather nice :)


This is not precise. You say not invented or imagined yet you include thoughts as a fact?

If we had no confusion there'd be real clarity and the seeing of things as they are. Also we'd have immense energy because the mind would not be diffused or caught in illusion.


This is ... cannot think of a word! IF we have no confusion we therefore understand everything or we are just basking in ignorance. Either way we would be essentially inanimate and nothing. Without thought, reason, logic or what we call human existence.
What you are referring to here is human death not life.

A mind that is confused, seeking, needing a purpose, creating goals for itself, is always agitated; there's no end to its movement.


Basically its alive. Seeing beyond the pursuit to the reality is the beauty of life. I can only speak from experience and I have had tears of joy rolling down my face because I questioned relentlessly. The futile pursuit you refer to has given me an epiphany beyond anything else I have ever experience and a peace of mind and an excitement and intense bliss beyond words. The futility of the pursuit is the endless journey to the unobtainable and unforeseeable goal. The realisation of the futility of purpose in life gives emphasis to the purpose to look for purpose if you know it is beyond you.

Ah damn! Now I'm just preaching! :P
Listen to yourself you are the only teacher you have just don't believe everything you tell yourself.

FREEWILL. It is the only thing I struggle with philosophically. This is my drive and my nemesis, my joy and my pain. It is my purpose to explore the possible illusion of freewill and tame it because it is natures will through me as and when.

It is a hard life when you cannot see a way out of happiness :P
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5570
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: The purpose of life

Postby charon on May 10th, 2012, 3:45 pm 

BadgerJelly

I thought it was clear that I mean nature as everything .. hence nature/universe/life


In that case how can we not be of it?

Ideologies bring diversity


Diversity of what? Wars? Ideas which breed counter-ideas?

Without them their would only be a sense of "me" not a sense of "us"


You mean to say that there's only a sense of humanity as a whole through ideology? Surely not. Ideologies are not reality nor do they lead to it. A person conditioned in an ideology, even if that ideology believes in the oneness of mankind, is separate from another who believes something different; the very conditioning is the separative factor.

That sense of oneness only comes when there's no 'me'. It can't exist factually unless that happens.

There would be no individuals and no advancement in understanding


What do you mean by individual? The word means one who is undivided. As we are now we're not actually individuals at all, we're extremely divided. Each one is convinced that they're a separate entity all to themselves.

If you want peace either be open to understand at any cost or be ignorant and deluded


Yes, be open to understand, surely. But how can one be open to understand when the mind is enclosed in its own beliefs and prejudices?

Without opposition "we" are not


Yes, the 'we' as a group comes when we divide ourselves from others, thus creating opposition. Opposition is always ideational, it's between two beliefs, two ideologies, two opinions, two ideas, and so on. The moment we put a fence round ourselves it creates opposition. That's the whole conflict of the world in a nutshell.

what is reality if not a construct of concepts?


It's what is actually there - the earth and nature, the world of man with its miseries and conflicts. None of that is conceptual, it's all only too real, even if those conflicts are caused by concepts. Concepts as concepts are a reality but their content is not. I may believe in god, for example, but that god is not a reality, it's a concept divided from other gods, other concepts.

My reference was to nature and the purpose being natures purpose not ours


I know, you said that before, but you haven't been clear about what nature's purpose is. You've defined nature as everything. Has everything, all things as a whole, a purpose? Or it simply is?

We are in a sense the purpose of life just as everything living is


But that's the same thing in different words. The meaning of a thing is in itself.

Do you believe that our consciousness is somehow separate from nature? from existence? from life? from the universe?


No, it's part of the whole business.

(Consciousness) is just the mechanism of nature that produces concepts


Ah, that may be so. But that consciousness with its concepts is not the whole of life. Our consciousness is limited.

You cannot question without being confounded by something or you wouldn't question it? Your statement makes no sense to me. Confusion is a product of trying to understand. You take away confusion then you take away the ability to understand anything new


Can a confused mind learn? Or must it be free to learn?

You say not invented or imagined yet you include thoughts as a fact?


But thought is a fact. It takes place in the brain. They can scan it scientifically. It's a material process.

IF we have no confusion we therefore understand everything or we are just basking in ignorance


No, you keep saying it's only because of confusion that we learn or question. I doubt that. A confused mind can keep asking endless questions but that's not learning.

Seeing beyond the pursuit to the reality is the beauty of life


That's all I'm saying. But we're caught in the pursuit therefore we never break through. The pursuit is this endless groping, seeking. How can a mind which is perpetually groping find anything other than what it wants to find?

We think we are alive because we grope and seek but we never question that very seeking. Why do we seek and what do we seek? Do we seek truth or are we actually seeking something gratifying and having found it go to sleep? And when it becomes unsatisfactory start seeking again and repeat the whole cycle?

That's actually what we do, it's not an exaggeration. So the very first thing to learn is not to seek.

The futile pursuit you refer to has given me an epiphany beyond anything else I have ever experience and a peace of mind and an excitement and intense bliss beyond words


I meant only the endless pursuit of words and intellectualities. That is supremely futile. If we start with words, ideas, theories, we end up with words, ideas, and theories. One has to look, look at life, ourselves, and the world. Truth lies in the fact, in what actually is.

FREEWILL


We obviously have a measure of freedom of choice and decision but we don't have absolute freedom. We can't take off and fly or turn back time. All our choices are based on what is already known otherwise we couldn't make them.

Freedom is not freedom of thought or choice because those things are inevitably conditioned, it's something totally different. It's a complete absence of fear, problems, confusion. Only such a mind can come on truth.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1671
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: The purpose of life

Postby dragslaye on May 10th, 2012, 5:01 pm 

Interesting debate about the purpose of life, skip to 10 min the Spanish introduction, video is english
http://youtu.be/Uaq6ORDx1C4
User avatar
dragslaye
Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Location: Toronto


Re: The purpose of life

Postby BadgerJelly on May 11th, 2012, 1:11 am 

dragslaye wrote:Interesting debate about the purpose of life, skip to 10 min the Spanish introduction, video is english
http://youtu.be/Uaq6ORDx1C4


Not interesting at all. As soon as he mention progress the guy made himself look foolish and I stopped listening.

They are out to debunk religion nothing more. They cannot see the wood for the trees with there ideological attack on religious dogma.

Purpose is a concept created by nature through us. Nature itself is not "created" because it is.

Basically this link has nothing to offer other than the obvious human perspective with is biased and bounded by itself.

I think I am correct in saying we are not discussing creationism here ... I certainly am not! I am discussing the entire issue of existence one which Dawkins himself has actually chosen to avoid as he see the question as unanswerable which is ridiculous IMO considering he is a scientist.

Here is Dawkins and Krauss freely they chose not to dwell on the subject because it is not important :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5kPoaeg60c&feature=relmfu

If they actually go on to talk beyond what they deem "important" in the link you have provided let me know and I might bother to watch it. Otherwise its just a waste of 90mins for me listening to what I have heard and thought about already.

btw what is YOUR view? The concept of purpose exists so where did it come from? That is how I approached the question. Too many people focus on the answer without questioning the question which to me is stupid considering that every "answer" we have to date is just an approximation.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5570
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: The purpose of life

Postby charon on May 11th, 2012, 5:10 am 

dragslaye wrote:Interesting debate about the purpose of life, skip to 10 min the Spanish introduction, video is english
http://youtu.be/Uaq6ORDx1C4


I watched it too although I thought the presentation threatened to overshadow the arguments. I think you probably need a bit more than a minute to present an argument and the speakers kept getting cut off. But I quite liked the idea of the boxing ring :)

My first impulse, like Badger, was not to bother because we'd heard it all before. Then I thought I was being impatient so I persevered. The trouble is that both sides are right in their way. And both are wrong too.

The scientists are essentially materialists. They think they'll crack the mystery of existence by reducing matter to its smallest component etc. They're looking in the wrong place. All the religions have always said 'look within' and they're not doing that. One has to transcend the self to find out. That's long been established. It needs meditation.

The theists are probably on safer ground because there is certainly a mystery but the question is whether they actually know what it is or whether it's only a belief they have. Who can say?

Then you have the fence-sitters who simply say it's all undecidable.

The mind is very interesting. It can only work within its own boundaries, repeating what it knows.

And shouldn't they have asked the audience for a vote at the end? I thought that was missing.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1671
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: The purpose of life

Postby BadgerJelly on May 11th, 2012, 8:46 am 

In that case how can we not be of it?


The same way your heart is in you and of you. The same way we are of the Earth but the Earth is its own entity. It really is not that great a leap is it?

Diversity of what? Wars? Ideas which breed counter-ideas?


Diversity brings existence by definition of what it is. With no diversity you have no change and with no change you have no time and with no time you have no human sense of reality.

You mean to say that there's only a sense of humanity as a whole through ideology? Surely not.


Of course? Ideologies come from ideas, ideas from concepts (and vice versa) and concepts are constructed in our consciousness.
Human ideologies are our conceptualisation of reality but they are not the totality of reality obviously.

There would be no individuals and no advancement in understanding


What do you mean by individual? The word means one who is undivided. As we are now we're not actually individuals at all, we're extremely divided. Each one is convinced that they're a separate entity all to themselves.


I mean individual as in I am not you and you are not me. You are you and I am me. We do not agree and by not agreeing we advance our individual understandings of our own ideas and maybe each others too. Individuality and diversity can only exist with opposing conceptions.

I honestly do not understand how you don't see this?

Yes, be open to understand, surely. But how can one be open to understand when the mind is enclosed in its own beliefs and prejudices?


This is certainly a dilemma. The only way sensibly is to try and reject the ego as much as humanly possible without losing a grip on reality. Like I have said before I try to practice utter ignorance and utter arrogance and then try to reel myself back in and try and dissect each perspective ... obviously its not perfect but it is the best I can do that I can think of at the moment. It has yielded results for me.

Yes, the 'we' as a group comes when we divide ourselves from others, thus creating opposition. Opposition is always ideational, it's between two beliefs, two ideologies, two opinions, two ideas, and so on. The moment we put a fence round ourselves it creates opposition. That's the whole conflict of the world in a nutshell.


Are you seeing only the negative aspect of opposition or thinking I do not see it? We are both stating obvious truths here yet you seem blinkered by negativity.

what is reality if not a construct of concepts?


It's what is actually there - the earth and nature, the world of man with its miseries and conflicts. None of that is conceptual, it's all only too real, even if those conflicts are caused by concepts. Concepts as concepts are a reality but their content is not. I may believe in god, for example, but that god is not a reality, it's a concept divided from other gods, other concepts.


You are talking about physicality represented by our senses I am talking about what reality is to us. They are the same thing. Nature (the physical laws that reside in our physical perception) is what it is and we cannot experience it directly. I am talking about the subatomic and cosmic laws of nature that manifest and mechanise existence.
Human entities exist as a direct consequence of the laws of nature and we experience reality through our construction of conceptions based on the input of the senses. The physicality of natures existence is only partially experienced through our senses, and not precise or lucid manner due to the restraints of the laws of nature.

I know, you said that before, but you haven't been clear about what nature's purpose is. You've defined nature as everything. Has everything, all things as a whole, a purpose? Or it simply is?


I don't know. I think it is best to ask why we have the concept of purpose to start with.

It does seem from our limited perspective though that an entirety cannot have purpose but we are guessing because this is on a scale that is truly confounding. And like I said the most confounding question we can maybe start to elude to is why the concept of purpose exists at all? Is there a purpose in the conception of purpose?

For humans we see the pattern of diversity in nature and the birth of organisms and humans through nature but we are just a possibility that had to happen because we are. What nature has given us is the purpose to question purpose but nature is not actually an entity it is everything. Nature is a mechanism as best we can see it but whether there is an actually purpose to it is debatable and it is something the vast majority of people will label unimportant in our insignificant position ... maybe one day we will see there is a purpose to it or not? Who knows? Maybe in death that is the pure surrender of reality and dissolution into the vastness of nature? That is where metaphysics begins I guess and speculation gives rise to new ideas and explorations to further understand.

It is almost unquestionable to me that nature by its laws forces communication and interaction and through these processes gives organic life a furthering of diversity to further diversity. This time line of the seemingly simple to the complex is a fascinating mechanism of nature. Through union in nature we see both diversity and balance and through the laws of entropy we see the future should be perfect and therefore highly unstable? It is a truly baffling fact of nature that we see this fluctuation of reaching for balance and then destruction and rebirth before it gets to the balanced state. It astounds me that we find both of these things happening at the micro and macro scale too in quantum and black holes.

Do you believe that our consciousness is somehow separate from nature? from existence? from life? from the universe?


No, it's part of the whole business.


GOOD! You had me worried then :P This is almost a step towards the purpose of the nature to go down this line. It is a possibility just like we are all birthed of a flying pink donkey but obviously this is going into something beyond us at this point in time I believe.

Ah, that may be so. But that consciousness with its concepts is not the whole of life. Our consciousness is limited.


Yes I agree. My point is though that we, as you say, are "part of the whole business". So our limited perception of reality is opaqued by its existence within the system of natures construct.

Can a confused mind learn? Or must it be free to learn?


I am saying with no confusion there is only delusion or enlightenment. We can learn things we do not know but only within a limitation. We can be a little confused by a mathematical question but we can figure it out with some thought. The more complex the mathematical working the more confusing the path to the final answer.
So I would say a certain amount of freedom is needed in the sense of having the right tools for the job. Computers compute humans are not very good at computing.

Anyway tired and hungry ... thanks for this its fun to push :)
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5570
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: The purpose of life

Postby charon on May 11th, 2012, 2:59 pm 

BadgerJelly

I mean individual as in I am not you and you are not me. You are you and I am me. We do not agree and by not agreeing we advance our individual understandings of our own ideas and maybe each others too. Individuality and diversity can only exist with opposing conceptions.

I honestly do not understand how you don't see this?


I agree, I am not you and you are not me, but are we therefore separate?

Be careful! We can be different without being divided. It's our ideas and conceptions which divide us, that's all.

The only way sensibly is to try and reject the ego as much as humanly possible


That's all one can do. If there's no ego is there separation? Ego means 'me' different from 'you', 'me' here and 'you' there. That's a conceptual difference, not an actual one. We may have separate bodies but there's no separate consciousness. The actuality is that none of us are separate. There's no 'us' and 'them', there's just ourselves.

Are you seeing only the negative aspect of opposition or thinking I do not see it? We are both stating obvious truths here yet you seem blinkered by negativity


No. When are we in opposition? When there is disagreement over facts, right? One says there is god, another says there isn't. One believes in capitalism, another doesn't.

Nowadays there's this movement of atheism which is seeking to debunk religion. I know you're aware of this. They claim only not to believe, whereas the others do, but it's organised itself into a group mentality with its gurus (Dawkins et al), its cliches, its repeated ideas, its meetings, and all the rest of it. Therefore it's become as much a factor of division as any religion ever did.

Human entities exist as a direct consequence of the laws of nature and we experience reality through our construction of conceptions based on the input of the senses


Absolutely, therefore our experience of reality is limited, conditioned. It's that conditioning which has to end if we're to see what is really there.

I think it is best to ask why we have the concept of purpose to start with


That's what I've been doing since the very start of all this!

Maybe in death that is the pure surrender of reality and dissolution into the vastness of nature?


Yes, that's what happens. You've solved it.

this is going into something beyond us at this point in time I believe


Nothing is beyond us at this point of time or any other. It's all there, just as it always has been, waiting to be discovered.

our limited perception of reality is opaqued by its existence within the system of natures construct


Opaqued means shut out, obscured. Our limited perception is brought about by the senses and physical limitations. They have to be transcended, which occurs when the whole being is silent.

I am saying with no confusion there is only delusion or enlightenment


No, delusion is still confusion. The vision is only clear when the mind is completely unconfused and simple. After all, if there's no illusion what is left?
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1671
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: The purpose of life

Postby BadgerJelly on May 11th, 2012, 10:24 pm 

Seriously no idea what you think when I say individual?
Maybe you better look up the definition because your definition does not sem to relate to any definition I can find.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5570
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: The purpose of life

Postby BadgerJelly on May 11th, 2012, 11:03 pm 

Maybe in death that is the pure surrender of reality and dissolution into the vastness of nature?

Yes, that's what happens. You've solved it.


What the hell are you talking about? Are you a God or something? When did you die?

I think it is best to ask why we have the concept of purpose to start with


That's what I've been doing since the very start of all this!


Exactly when? All I have been saying is why we have these concepts through nature and that they are a reflection of it through us. We are nature and of it.

It is becoming clear you are referring to something spiritual now. What do you believe?

No, delusion is still confusion. The vision is only clear when the mind is completely unconfused and simple. After all, if there's no illusion what is left?


Now you are in the realm of transcendental meditation? This is comparable to the premise of quantum computers too I think. I think you are confusion by the meaning of confusion? Absence is absence. With no confusion there is no meaning and with no meaning nothing exists.
If you really want to transcend consciousness put a loaded gun in your mouth and pull the trigger. I'm happy to wait for that to happen naturally myself because I'm having fun living a human life and what happens after will happen or not as it will.

That's all one can do. If there's no ego is there separation? Ego means 'me' different from 'you', 'me' here and 'you' there. That's a conceptual difference, not an actual one. We may have separate bodies but there's no separate consciousness. The actuality is that none of us are separate. There's no 'us' and 'them', there's just ourselves.


I did not say no Ego. No ego is the destruction of humanity. Are you eluding to the spiritual again?
I think you must be religious and belief in life after death? This is such nonsense to me and most of what you are now saying has turned into spiritualism. I am thinking in the manner of the laws of physics which are the best interpretations we have of our sensed reality. If you start saying the universe has a consciousness literally then you've gone down a path of I am not going down. If on the other hand you are merely referring to the fact we have all come from one place (which we have done according to cosmology) then I agree but the use of the term consciousness can be taken to mean something else. Consciousness is a physical thing because there is only physical that we know of. You are talking metaphysics I am talking physics.

If you want to go down that path you may as well say we've all been farted out of a big floating pink donkey. That is about how much credence I give spiritualistic ideologies
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5570
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: The purpose of life

Postby charon on May 12th, 2012, 6:00 am 

BadgerJelly wrote:Seriously no idea what you think when I say individual?
Maybe you better look up the definition because your definition does not sem to relate to any definition I can find.


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/individual

'Origin of INDIVIDUAL
Medieval Latin individualis, from Latin individuus indivisible, from in- + dividuus divided, from dividere to divide'
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1671
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: The purpose of life

Postby charon on May 12th, 2012, 6:52 am 

BadgerJelly

What the hell are you talking about?


The death of self, not physical death.

exactly when?


'Why do you want a purpose at all? That's the real question'

viewtopic.php?f=55&t=21237&start=90#p207405

'No, I'm querying all 'purposes of life'. That's my point.... I think the real question is why we want a purpose at all'

viewtopic.php?f=55&t=21237&start=120#p207849

'Since we're supposed to be discussing the purpose of life, is that a concept?... If it is a concept why has it arisen?'

viewtopic.php?f=55&t=21237&start=120#p208230

What do you believe?


Nothing. I don't believe in things that aren't really there.

Now you are in the realm of transcendental meditation? This is comparable to the premise of quantum computers too I think. I think you are confusion by the meaning of confusion? Absence is absence. With no confusion there is no meaning and with no meaning nothing exists.

If you really want to transcend consciousness put a loaded gun in your mouth and pull the trigger. I'm happy to wait for that to happen naturally myself because I'm having fun living a human life and what happens after will happen or not as it will


I only asked: if there's no illusion what is left?

It has nothing to do with transcendental meditation or life after death. It's a very simple question. As long as we're caught up in various illusions, of which there are many types, obviously we can't see straight. So I'm asking what there is when all illusion has gone, that's all.

I did not say no Ego. No ego is the destruction of humanity


How are you using the word ego? Ego means selfishness, big-headedness, arrogance, conceit. The destruction of that is hardly the destruction of humanity. It's more like the saving of it!

If you start saying the universe has a consciousness literally then you've gone down a path of I am not going down


I didn't say the universe has a consciousness. I said we have consciousness and that consciousness is limited.

All this has nothing to do with religious belief. We're dealing with facts, and we know what a fact is. Fact is that which actually exists, nothing imagined or invented.

Aren't human beings egotistical? Of course they are! They want power, dominance, they're frightened, greedy, possessive, jealous. They're self-centered and all the rest of it. You can't deny it. If there's an end to self-centeredness what happens? Is that what love is? Love isn't self-centeredness, is it?

If you want to go down that path you may as well say we've all been farted out of a big floating pink donkey. That is about how much credence I give spiritualistic ideologies


But previously you were saying ideologies gave rise to wonderful diversity. Now you are insulting them, or a particular type at least.

I don't do beliefs or ideologies. I've consistently talked against them as a destructive and divisive factor. Everything I'm saying is factual. It's there in front of us, observable, testable.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1671
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: The purpose of life

Postby BadgerJelly on May 12th, 2012, 1:07 pm 

Ok was worried where you were going then! Just getting wary because I have mentioned Occultism a few times on this site and people may get the wrong idea. As soon as things start to sound spiritual in any way I tend to react negatively because it reeks of delusion to me. That said it is interesting that many people want to have "souls" and an afterlife and I guess that comes full circle to our inherent want for purpose.

I'll get to this when I have time ... just moved house, need to travel soon and sort out a job/s PLUS another topic has popped up I want to delve into.

Look forward to continuing this soon :)
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5570
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: The purpose of life

Postby dragslaye on May 12th, 2012, 2:14 pm 

BadgerJelly wrote:
dragslaye wrote:Interesting debate about the purpose of life, skip to 10 min the Spanish introduction, video is english
http://youtu.be/Uaq6ORDx1C4


Not interesting at all. As soon as he mention progress the guy made himself look foolish and I stopped listening.


Had you listen to the entire debate, you might had learn that the argument than the scientist were trying to get across is that there was simply no purpose of life. Which is quite interesting, by life lacking of a purpose, we are able to create our own purpose, in another world there are 7 Billion different purpose of life right now, and more and been created as I type this post, and as soon as life continuous more purposes would be created, and this very though I find it incredibly amusing
User avatar
dragslaye
Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Location: Toronto


Re: The purpose of life

Postby BadgerJelly on May 12th, 2012, 3:14 pm 

Well I have heard that before. I was not being dismissive of the debate I just do not have time at the moment to listen to 90mins.

The existence of the concept of purpose is much more interesting and relevant to me and it can actually get closer to the the original question of the purpose of life.

There may be none, or as Dawkins himself said we may all be in a computer program created by an alien entity ... if there are 7 billion different purposes available what intrigues me is the commonality within this concepts of purpose. Is it merely fear? For me it seems to be the absolute want and need to question because that is what it appears to be from every conceivable angle I look at it from within the confines of physics. Outside our understanding of physics (meaning where the laws of nature seem to break down - singularities) things are beyond us at the moment and may always be beyond us BUT we are of and in nature so ... ??

I will try and watch it within this week but MAD busy. No doubt there will be something of use there as there is everywhere if you look into it hard enough I have found ... cannot look everywhere though sadly :(
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5570
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: The purpose of life

Postby charon on May 14th, 2012, 9:22 am 

dragslaye

the argument than the scientist were trying to get across is that there was simply no purpose of life


Without taking sides, to be fair, that was only one half of the debate. It seems you've chosen a side and extrapolated from there.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1671
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: The purpose of life

Postby BadgerJelly on May 17th, 2012, 4:10 pm 

Ego - "I", or self.

I did just write a big sum up of where we are charon then deleted it by accident :(

I'll be a bit more brief now and hopefully we can continue helping each other. I'll tell you where I am and you tell me where you are.

I am using a tool of evolutionary conceptualised. By this I mean where our ideologies come from. eg. the concept of food comes from our need to express and communicate our need for energy to another human. The concept of energy exists through the movement of matter through time. etc...

So the concept of purpose exists because we live and die and see ends and beginning in our seemingly ephemeral existence.

Anyway that is a snippet of how I approach EVERY subject at some point or another.

My conclusion is the purpose of human life is to question. To what end is another question :P
Like I have said MANY times before its all communication/interaction.

I do feel how I think is important because the emotional reaction I had when thinking about all this and more a few months back gave me what can only be described as something indescribable. Eureka, epiphany and awe are the best I can think of. This came in the face of me accepting utter defeat in trying to understand everything so I decided to stop thinking about it and just enjoy life and do what I wanted and so I thought about doing something I had been putting off for years ... ironically once I surrendered the questions I had been asking about everything in the universe/life/existence washed over me in an overwhelming wave. I am sure many people think I am mad but that is okay. If I am that is fine too :)

I now know teaching anyone directly is wrong. All any of us can do is listen to ourselves and learn from ourselves ... I cannot even express it!! My biggest problem is figuring out how to express something without expressing it? I hate the way I sound its despicable but its all I have at the moment. If you are materialistic I guess it is like winning the lottery but not being allowed to give any of the money anyway to those you love and care for. Its a great and fortuitous gift but worthless if not shared.

Anyway this place is a great release for me and I learn more and more every time I come here and just live in hope that I learn enough to do something with my nature ... if not no big deal I guess I'll keep smiling when I can :)

I want to lay my soul bare to everyone and its scary and fun. Never been a big communicator with others (I have with myself though) and I am certainly more inclined to spend time alone than around others. Loneliness does scare so many people and that saddens me very much sometimes because we are each such a fascinating gift to ourselves as much as we are to each other.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5570
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: The purpose of life

Postby charon on May 17th, 2012, 8:30 pm 

BadgerJelly

I did just write a big sum up of where we are charon then deleted it by accident :(


Probably divine justice! (sorry, just a joke)

you tell me where you are


Nowhere. It depends what you say :)

I do feel how I think is important because the emotional reaction I had when thinking about all this and more a few months back gave me what can only be described as something indescribable. Eureka, epiphany and awe are the best I can think of. This came in the face of me accepting utter defeat in trying to understand everything so I decided to stop thinking about it and just enjoy life and do what I wanted and so I thought about doing something I had been putting off for years ... ironically once I surrendered the questions I had been asking about everything in the universe/life/existence washed over me in an overwhelming wave. I am sure many people think I am mad but that is okay. If I am that is fine too :)


It happens. Your brain was occupied then suddenly it wasn't. That's when things happen, in the unoccupied space.

I now know teaching anyone directly is wrong. All any of us can do is listen to ourselves and learn from ourselves


No, you can teach others but it depends how it's done and what you're teaching. If you're conscious that you're teaching it's not the right kind of teaching.

When you say 'All any of us can do is listen to ourselves and learn from ourselves' then you're teaching. Get it? That phrase came from your heart not your ego.

My biggest problem is figuring out how to express something without expressing it?


Don't bother, just say what you want.

But you haven't answered my question yet! If there's no illusion, what is left?
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1671
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: The purpose of life

Postby BadgerJelly on May 18th, 2012, 3:25 am 

If there is no illusion what is left?

Be more specific or you'll no doubt just end up parroting back to me what I have just said like you did about teaching.

For starters illusion is something unknowable in itself. How do we know what an illusion is?

If you are using the term illusion here in the sense of the discussion we have been having I think we're defining it as human perception through our senses?

If so then in the sense of the universe if you cut through our "illusion" of it (better to say perception) then what is left is :

The nameless. A corporeal entity without conception ... its undefinable by its lack of definition.
Taoists call it "The Way". In the book of Aslepcius from the Hermetica "nameless" is used. In Christianity and many religions this philosophy has be supplanted by the term "God" and the nameless was named missing the entire point.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5570
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: The purpose of life

Postby charon on May 18th, 2012, 5:48 am 

BadgerJelly

The nameless


Absolutely. But is that just a word to you or a reality?
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1671
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: The purpose of life

Postby BadgerJelly on May 18th, 2012, 9:09 am 

Absolutely. But is that just a word to you or a reality?


Here is my answer :
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5570
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: The purpose of life

Postby charon on May 18th, 2012, 2:02 pm 

Don't know? :)
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1671
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: The purpose of life

Postby neuro on May 18th, 2012, 2:14 pm 

charon wrote:Don't know? :)


My impression is Badger simply means that if it is THE nameless, how would you dare reduce it to a word, or even a mere reality?
User avatar
neuro
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2624
Joined: 25 Jun 2010
Location: italy


Re: The purpose of life

Postby BadgerJelly on May 18th, 2012, 2:21 pm 

neuro wrote:
charon wrote:Don't know? :)


My impression is Badger simply means that if it is THE nameless, how would you dare reduce it to a word, or even a mere reality?


Exactly! :)
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5570
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: The purpose of life

Postby charon on May 18th, 2012, 2:30 pm 

Badger, neuro

Oh, no, that's obfuscation. Either you know or you don't.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1671
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: The purpose of life

Postby BadgerJelly on May 18th, 2012, 3:27 pm 

charon wrote:Badger, neuro

Oh, no, that's obfuscation. Either you know or you don't.


If you do not understand my answer then you do not understand my answer.

More to the point what do you think if you disagree with my reply?
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5570
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


PreviousNext

Return to Anything Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests