What's the point of existing when you're just going to die and not exist anymore? If all that happens when we die is that things go black and then you stop thinking forever, why would you care about anything that happens after you?
Why build anything? Why make anything? Why bother leaving a legacy? Why do anything that's not the immediate and selfish pursuit of pleasure? You won't give a fuck after you're dead if the whole world prospers or rots.
Give me one reason why I should care about anyone but myself beyond what benefits me and gratifies my whims.
If you look at it from the perspective of eternalism and see the distinction between past, present and future as basically an illusion, and see yourself as a spacetime worm whose life is eternally happening, then death starts to look a lot less like some kind of oblivion. Every moment of your life is eternally passing, thinking itself to be the one and only 'present', but that's just an illusion.
It's like your life is a book, or a narrative, and death is just the conclusion of it. The beginning and the end of the book and everything in between are equally real. The book doesn't cease to exist when you reach the end of it.
This might not even be true, and it doesn't automatically mean that life has meaning or anything like that, but I think it's a perspective that makes sense when you let it set in and it does away with the notion that death renders life meaningless. I don't know if I'm explaining it well, it just makes sense to me. It also makes suicide very unappealing because it's just a 'bad ending' rather than something that grants peace.
Austin Perez
well we don't know if the universe isn't going to repeat itself and you be born again, but since you would lose all your memories it wouldn't make a difference of course
Ethan Butler
There's no evidence to suggest any of that is true. And if I'm going believe something based on no evidence, at that point I'd rather just believe in a religion that promises an afterlife.
I'm more terrified of the idea that I'll stop existing when I die, and that makes me question why I should waste my time having morals.
A whole lot of paranormal superstition that can be heaped onto the ever-growing pile of feel-good "theories"about what happens when we die that will be forgotten in time like the rest of the ones I've read.
Why should I believe THIS pantheistic views of God and Afterlife or whatever and not the countless others written by academics and scholars throughout time? What makes this one so sure HE'S figured out the true meaning of life and HIS interpretation of it is the right one?
Jaxon Phillips
Because if you actually read the paper, you will realize that his argument is based on empirical evidence, instead of faith, personal opinions, hopes, guesses, etc. Here is a more easily digestible item: youtu.be/WnoIf2NwaRY
Yeah right, just like all those Christian Apologetics experts, religious scientists, and scholars claim that their beliefs are based on empirical evidence, instead of faith, personal opinions, hopes, guesses, etc.
i ain't reading all that shit, and its mostly an argument for taking the study of afterlife more seriously not an argument for an afterlife. plus i've read about this before and most of it is based on stories of people who had near death experiences then someone how got information that they wouldn't know otherwise. and a lot of it seems pretty coincidental.
also when it asks you to click on traffic lights do you guys click the polls also?
Leo Adams
So the well was poisoned by idiots in the past, and therefore it can never be clean again?
Can I be honest, I've never understood this concern. It seems almost like a non-sequitur. Life is meant to be lived, and to keep on living. I don't know why, but I know that's true, and that guides me. Just think of it this way: You are the product of every ancestor before you's choice to live and reproduce. I don't just mean back to like, 1000 years ago, I mean all the way back to the dawn of creation. Whether that was when lighting struck mud 4 billion years ago or god created the Earth 10,000 years ago, your life is linked directly to that act of creation, and life has kept on existing since then. It plans to keep on living too. Your rational brain can't seem to handle this fact, but look around you; life lives likes its going to keep on living forever. Is that true? Will life find a way? Why does life find a way? What is life finding a way to? What is it finding a way for? I don't know, but I'm never going to abandon life.
>There's no evidence to suggest any of that is true. What a meme. Do you think empiricism is empirically verifiable? Everything can be reduced to consciousness. The constructs we create with our rational minds are as imperfect as our physical form. Unless you take self-evident maxims as self-evident, and there's no evidence to suggest that they are, then every logical argument eventually becomes circular, and thus logic itself falls apart. You'll need to make a leap of faith somewhere buddy. If nature were simple enough for human beings to understand, we'd be so simple we couldn't.
Easton Fisher
Well you can either believe in eternalism (all moments in time are equally real) or presentism (only the moment we currently experience as present is real). Neither can be proven true or false as far as I know, but eternalism makes a lot more sense to me. If space and time are a continuum, then why should things that aren't 'present' in time be any less real than things that aren't 'present' in space? Why should something a hundred years ago be regarded as any less real than something a hundred miles away? A conscious being experiences each moment as the present during that moment, creating the illusion that time is 'flowing', that the past is gone and the future is nothing yet. But there's no real reason to assume that the moment we happen to be experiencing now is privileged over any other moment, all of which seem to be the only 'real' moment to the minds that exist within them. Presentism is the default position because it seems intuitive, but human intuition wasn't designed to make sense of metaphysics, so there's no reason to assume presentism is correct just because it feels natural.
This isn't like believing in a religion, it's just a choice between two models. It's not like God or heaven or reincarnation where you have a choice between a million different ideas vs simply not believing. Those are positive claims where you either believe them on faith or you don't, but with eternalism vs presentism you kind of have to believe in one or the other, if you don't simply ignore it.
Sorry, I think I'm terrible at trying to express this shit.
Luke Collins
Life is trying to find a way because creatures that try to live as hard as possible are more likely to live and reproduce, and the ones that don't die off.
It's not because there's some greater meaning to it, creatures aren't all trying to live forever. What your suggesting sounds like a delusion based on a misunderstood observation of life trying to live as long as possible.
Rocks erode under water pressure. Bigger rocks erode slower and last longer. That same statement you made can be said about rocks. Why are rocks trying so hard not to erode? Why do rocks always find a way to keep being rocks? Why do rocks keep depositing back into the earth to become new rocks once they broke down?
>You'll need to make a leap of faith somewhere buddy. So that's why I should just believe some religion or philosophy? Because "you just gotta do it and evidence is a meme?"
Dylan Murphy
Then what is this crisis you're facing, Mr. Rock? Why are you asking questions, Mr. Rock? Mr. "if we're all eroding what's the point of being a rock," what's the big deal? Again, all of what you just said is founded on an imperfect method of knowing known as empiricism, but everything that we know can be reduced to consciousness. Like I said, logic itself is incomplete without founding axioms, and there is no way to arrive at any first axioms through reason alone. So yeah, , pick an idea an go with it. Pick something that feels right to you. If that's a god, a philosophy, or a noose, fucking do it. We're all rocks anyways right, being eroded? If you decide to be a rock that aspires to something greater, if you're a rock that pursues virtue and beauty and truth, and that makes your life better, what does it matter that you're a rock being eroded like all the other rocks? You might get it wrong, but all the other rocks are miserable, and you aren't. Congrats.
Chase King
>Give me one reason why I should care about anyone but myself beyond what benefits me and gratifies my whims.
Because there is a chance everyone else has the same selfawarenes thing in them making them the same as you. Everyone is the main character while everyone else are the NPC.
Cooper Long
Alright, my belief is that my own personal pleasure is the highest priority. I should live selfishly and exploit people to get what I want to the maximum capacity that I can get away with.
If I see an opportunity to commit a crime or immoral act that I can definitely get away with and will bring me pleasure, be it rape, theft, fraud, bullying, harassment, lying, cheating, ect. then I'll do it.
I'll live for myself That's the idea that I picked that feels right to me. I might get it wrong, but all the other rocks are miserable, and I'm not. Congrats to me.
Sound good?
Austin Ortiz
>Pick something that feels right to you. Maybe that was too harsh a statement. Look though, you don't have a lot of options. You can go the revelation route, and look for a prophet who can tell you what the truth is, or you can go the Platonic and Socratic route and try to derive truth from creatures. BE WARNED HOWEVER, the P/S route leads to nihilism and deconstructionism, if you follow the thread of Western Philosophy to its end point. Perhaps you'd like to try some traditionalist thinkers? Some Eastern philosophy? Read some Uzdavinys? Perhaps you'd like to mix and match, jump around, look at competing schools to see what they have to offer? I'll tell you this though, "hurr durr we're all rocks," is a shallow and dead-end route, and philosophy and religion are important aspects of both seeking truth, and communing with the aspects of humanity that are deeper than reason. Lmao, or go this route. Are you being facetious, or do you actually believe that a life or rape, murder, and presumably jail time is going to bring you a happy life? Do you think leaving a trail of misery behind you is a winning strategy for life? I'm not even philosophizing right now, I'm just pointing out that people who spread misery tend to be miserable people themselves. Furthermore, you're asking philosophical questions, so I assume you place value on truth? If you place value on truth, I assume you place value on virtue as well (you want to know what the best way to live your life is)? If you place value on these things, then explain to me how living a life closed to a pursuit of the transcendant and virtuous will reap you any happiness? Could you close yourself from these things if you tried?
Hudson Williams
> to the maximum capacity that I can get away with
The only reason you even think half those things are wrong is because you grew up in a (presumably, if you speak english) Christian-based society that used to be dedicated to that religion and its teachings.
Lots of societies believed (and still believe) rape, pedophilia, murder, theft, bullying and other things of that nature are perfectly ok and in some cases moral, and they've endured for centuries. Your view of "transcendant and virtuous" is base purely on a bedrock of religious values without the actual religion.
I'm going back to my original post; if I can do these things in a way that I can get away with it without getting caught, why shouldn't I when I get the opportunity?
David Gomez
Your whole post is a non-sequitur. You don't 'know' any of these things, you're asserting them. Also, you haven't answered my question: If you place value on truth and therefore virtue, explain to me how abandoning the pursuit of the transcendant and virtous will reap you happiness? Also, since you seem to be exploring ideas of relativism, let me demonstrate why relativism is a dead-end. Here are two statements: "Nothing is perfect." "Perfection exists." Now, if the Laws of Logic apply, the first statement cannot be true, because it contradicts itself. If "nothing is perfect," then that statement cannot be perfect, so perfection must exist, which contradicts the statement. A modified statement, "perhaps nothing is perfect," runs into the same problem, since there is a chance that perfection exists, and a chance that we run into the same contradiction. Finally, the statement, "perfection exists" does not contradict itself, because if it is true, then that statement may be perfect and the alternative, that perfection doesn't exist, is again contradictory. So, if we assume the axiom of logic, then we know there must be a 'perfect,' and this is where we get into Plato, the world of forms, and divine simplicity within the Christian context. Of course, Logic might not be an axiom we can use, but that gets back to what I was saying initially, and you seem to assume logic, judging by your statements. Alright, now please answer my question.
Austin Long
Pass on grand pops jeans
Logan Perez
Because your definition of what a virtuous life looks like is completely different from 99.99% of the earth. What if I lead a "virtuous life" in the eyes of radical Islam? There is no such thing as virtue; it's a delusion of the human mind. Give me irrefutable proof that it isn't or I'm not wasting my time pursuing it.
Elijah Parker
It's eternal recurrence of the same; according to Nietzsche's let's say thought experiment, you'll relive your life exactly as it is. The point is to decide what you want your life to be, but anything that comes after will have been washed away by the next cycle.
Jaxon James
>What's the point of existing when you're just going to die?
Look at Emil Cioran, the pessimist philosopher. He spent his whole life thinking about, worrying and wishing for his own death, and when it was near, and of natural causes, his regret was that he spent his whole life preparing for his death but never actually lived.
Nigger, I didn't stay up for your response to get trolled. If you place value on truth, and thus on virtue, explain to me how abandoning the pursuit of the transcendant and virtuous will reap you happiness. >Give me irrefutable proof that it isn't or I'm not wasting my time pursuing it. What are you, a petulant child? Is the concept, "reason rests on faith" not sinking in for you or something? Do you assume self-evident axioms or not? If you do, which ones? Okay, once you've got that covered, start developing a philosophy. If you don't, find another way of knowing. Either way, you're going to need to accept that no human holds irrefutable truth of anything; the idea of 'irrefutable' is a misnomer. I mean, by saying that, you're implying logic again, which means you're implying perfect forms, which means you're just contradicting yourself over and over again with this talk of "virtue is a delusion of the human mind maaaaaaaaan." Could you even define, "human mind?" Would you define it using empiricism again, which you can't provide irrefutable proof for, by your own admissions?
Christopher Collins
This is honestly the most reasonable post on this entire thread.
Everything else is just a bunch of college philosophy drop-outs huffing their own farts
Caleb Morris
Why does your existence have to be permanent to have meaning?
Bentley James
We're past that. OP wants to know why he shouldn't become a radical muslim rapist if that's what he wants to be. I say he can be the fireman of Falluja if that's what he decides is best, but he has to explain why that would make him happy. He still won't budge from his Jugaad worldview of edgy relativism/worship of logic and empiricism without respect for any metaphysical foundation.
Alexander Parker
>truth >and thus virtue
Why have you been assuming this whole time that truth is a virtue, or that if you believe in truth, you must also HAVE to believe in the concept of virtue? I believe in truth and I don't believe in virtue. Those things aren't the same thing.
You can keep asking that same stupid question all night and I'll keep giving you the same answer. The pursuit of your precious "virtue" will not make me happy because I don't believe there is such a thing as right or wrong, and I don't get any gratification out of "doing good" for people, but abandoning it opens opportunities for pleasure that I would otherwise have to deny myself in pursuit of "virtue".
You've given me nothing but bullshit. You presented it so poorly that I don't even understand what you're even trying to convince me of, other than "no one can know anything for sure so there's no point in trying to find the truth".
PS I don't know what the fuck an "axiom" is, stop using it like that's a normal word that everybody knows what it means.
Easton Martin
>You presented it so poorly that I don't even understand t. coping brainlet > I don't know what the fuck an "axiom" is ohnonononononononAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH
However, if you have any empathy, you can think of how your actions might affect another person. If you think another person feels and does as you do, you can do what will bring the greatest good. It's hard to justify that type of empathy without getting into moral arguments or value judgments, so that's up to you to decide. With regards to altruism vs selfishness, it gets a little more murky as well. This isn't advocating a collectivist mindset, but there needs to be a balance between your individual pursuits and those of others. Ultimately, it boils down to everything has a consequence. Do what you want, but expect others to do the same.
Kevin Howard
If that was your goal in responding to this thread; to prove that you are smarter than me, congratulations, you are. You mission was successful. Your smart.
If your goal was to try and convince me to believe in something, you didn't do it.
I'm not trying to prove I'm smart, I'm not and I know I'm not. I'm trying to figure out why I'm even bothering to still live and I don't know that, and you haven't helped at all.
I'm glad asserting your philosophical superiority over people online made you able to find the happiness that I can't. Good night.
Michael Hughes
>Leaves with his tail between his legs. I was going to try and help you with these concepts, but you're intransigent. You expect god to come down and deliver you knowledge on a golden platter. I mean, if you believed in a religion, that would be your position, and there wouldn't be anything anyone could offer which would be more solid than that faith. You keep saying you believe in truth but not virtue, and that statement doesn't even make sense. If you believe in truth, you believe in ideals, and thus ideal forms. If you believe in ideals, you believe that we should try and pursue ideals (otherwise, what is an ideal?) So, this whole talk about, "I believe in truth but not virtue," is absolute nonsense. Like I said here you believe in empiricism and logic, but you don't acknowledge that these things are founded on self-evident axioms (look up what "axiom" means lol), which are arguably not self-evident, and therefore there is no "irrefutable" justification for them, and thus the truth you hold doesn't even meet your own standards. Then, you take this unfounded worldview, your 'truth', and you apply it in a contradictory fashion, stating that morality is relative. The whole thing is just an incomprehensive...mess. Sorry if I'm having hard time unraveling it in a way that you understand, Mr. Rock. Stay edgy and depressed if you want, or mature a little bit, and learn to seek truth. Goodnight, and best wishes.
