WHY DO YOU THINK WE ARE HERE? WHY DO WE EXIST?

[Nick_A]

No one, whether collectively or individually comes back from a long pilgrimage the same as when he left.

Who knows what any journey of discovery reveals or its value? How can such even be denoted or quantified? To make any such assumptions is thoroughly naive!

Imagine yourself walking on a city street and being part of the crowd. You are aware of all the interactions taking place and become part of these interactions. This is our normal reactive consciousness.

Now take an elevator up to the first floor and look down at the crowd from a window. It will create a different impression. Now take the elevator up to the second floor and look out. The crowd holds your attention even less and you become more aware of the surrounding areas. The crowd is becoming part of a larger perspective. Go up to the third floor and the crowd becomes only a small part of a much larger perspective. This is what I mean by conscious discovery. It creates a human perspective within which the street the street perspective is included.

Astronauts experience it. It is now called the Overview Effect.

https://www.businessinsider.com/overvie ... ace-2015-8

When astronauts first saw Earth from afar in the Apollo 8 mission in 1968 — the US's second manned mission to the moon — they described a cognitive shift in awareness after seeing our planet "hanging in the void."

This state of mental clarity, called the "overview effect," occurs when you are flung so far away from Earth that you become totally overwhelmed and awed by the fragility and unity of life on our blue globe. It's the uncanny sense of understanding the "big picture," and of feeling connected yet bigger than the intricate processes bubbling on Earth.

The point I am making is that the increased obsession with dualism and fragmentation makes it increasingly difficult to experience the overview effect even through simple efforts of conscious attention. We cannot experience ourselves from a conscious or human perspective Yet without a human perspective I cannot see why anyone would wonder why we exist and why we are here. Such a person is too caught up in the world, in Plato's cave, to take these basic philosophical religious questions seriously. If we cannot contemplate these questions how can we expect to be anything other than animal Man serving a cosmic necessity along with the rest of organic life on earth?

I really don't know what you're arguing against. Conscious discovery is what it's all about anyways! What I objected to is both simple and obvious, namely, that one can't know in advance what conscious discovery will reveal or what it's value will ultimately be so there's no point in asking. Evidently you disagreed with that. Conscious discovery means only that, the will to discover and not what it will discover; that's what the journey is for.

It's akin to packing one's bags in Plato's cave (which you incessantly bring up) and heading for the exit to see what one can see not knowing in advance what will be seen.

I realize in advance this doesn't make any sense to you!

It doesn't make sense to me since we are speaking of different things. You seem to be referring to discoveries within linear time which do not require self consciousness. I am referring to the conscious experience of the relative quality of a moment. This requires being conscious of the self. You don't seem to be aware of what this means so of course we lack communication.

[Greta]

It could go a few ways. The simplest would be that we die out but our machines/AI seed other worlds (or try to). Or AI itself may evolve and be the ones to carry on the torch, or perhaps cyborged humans. Or human minds be digitised and the people reconstructed on a safe world, without needing to worry about air, food, heat, cold, toxicity and so forth. There may well be Chinese or Indian arks since their Earthly lifestyles are often easy to improve upon.

In any event, it won't be "us" anymore whether or not we manage to pass the torch to some technological replacement of ourselves. With the way things have been developing that kind of development may not be such a bad thing.

...and if we don't make it in form or another, who cares!

I could not disagree more. With us and our successors comes the story of the entire journey - all those wondrous events and entities and personalities lost to time, all for naught. I can think of little worse.

[Nick_A]

Greta wrote:

It could go a few ways. The simplest would be that we die out but our machines/AI seed other worlds (or try to). Or AI itself may evolve and be the ones to carry on the torch, or perhaps cyborged humans. Or human minds be digitised and the people reconstructed on a safe world, without needing to worry about air, food, heat, cold, toxicity and so forth. There may well be Chinese or Indian arks since their Earthly lifestyles are often easy to improve upon.

The thread has verified that we don't know why we are here and why we exist so speculation is limited to imagining the future of humanity provided it doesn't become extinct due to either natural causes or human stupidity.

Is the future of humanity to become the ultimate machine, the integration of Man and AI and the glorification of the physical human body, or like St. Paul suggests is our potential evolutionary future a spiritual body and a quality of consciousness we cannot comprehend?

1 Corinthians 15

35 But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?” 36 How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. 38 But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body. 39 Not all flesh is the same: People have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. 40 There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another. 41 The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor.

42 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; 43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.

If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”[f]; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. 46 The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. 47 The first man was of the dust of the earth; the second man is of heaven. 48 As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the heavenly man, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we[g] bear the image of the heavenly man................

[Greta]

Greta wrote:

It could go a few ways. The simplest would be that we die out but our machines/AI seed other worlds (or try to). Or AI itself may evolve and be the ones to carry on the torch, or perhaps cyborged humans. Or human minds be digitised and the people reconstructed on a safe world, without needing to worry about air, food, heat, cold, toxicity and so forth. There may well be Chinese or Indian arks since their Earthly lifestyles are often easy to improve upon.

The thread has verified that we don't know why we are here and why we exist so speculation is limited to imagining the future of humanity provided it doesn't become extinct due to either natural causes or human stupidity.

Is the future of humanity to become the ultimate machine, the integration of Man and AI and the glorification of the physical human body, or like St. Paul suggests is our potential evolutionary future a spiritual body and a quality of consciousness we cannot comprehend?

Of course we don't know why we are here and thus speculate. You don't know either, which is why you speculate too. The alternative is not thinking about it, and since we're all thinkers here to some extent then that's perhaps not an option.

The crux is that the sooner we die out the less chance we have to better understand the nature of reality.

I do not see humans as the ultimate or final form of sentient existence after just 13.8b years. That's about 2% of the universe's projected age (barring the "big rip", which I don't think makes sense).

Humans never started out wanting to be wise, they just wanted to survive. In doing so, they became wiser simply through experience. So it's been throughout history, with various roadblocks here and there. Ultimately, we become wiser because we're more experienced, both individually and as a whole. Thus human stupidity is also a "natural cause". Developing beings will make mistakes along the way, both individually and collectively.

What will follow humans won't be "the ultimate machine" or the ultimate anything. We're still in the universe's infancy so everything in the foreseeable future would be a transitional infant form (which opens up extraordinary possibilities for the future). Unless there are natural limits to a species' progression, the ultimate future in a trillion years or so would seemingly be godlike. I say that as a science fan. Anything that survives the death of their planet, their solar system, even their galaxy is not operating in a way we humans could understand. I have a little speculation that belief in an ultimate deity is based on intuition of what might be possible in the future.

In terms of the qualitative aspect that I know you'd rather speak about, the mission would seemingly be to conquer suffering, to break the current natural cycles of suffering that are inherent in biology, where survival is only possible at the expense of other beings. It's a brutal system, requiring even the wisest to be somewhat blind to the trouble they cause other living things.

Ultimately, this is what everyone wants - to conquer suffering, or at least to cope with it with calm and equanimity, to be "above" our troubles. However, people disagree as to how that goal is best achieved, and often don't take into account individual differences, aptitudes or tendencies with their one-size-fits-all prescriptions.

[Dubious]

It doesn't make sense to me since we are speaking of different things. You seem to be referring to discoveries within linear time which do not require self consciousness. I am referring to the conscious experience of the relative quality of a moment. This requires being conscious of the self. You don't seem to be aware of what this means so of course we lack communication.

Self-consciousness or awareness is served by conscious experience which also requires time and exposure to what's new and foreign as a catalyst to thought. It doesn't consist of just sitting in an armchair reading Plato or Simone and expecting a revelation to hit you on the head.

Why does real genius incorporate multiple stages of development and becomes a great tragedy, a major loss when terminated by premature death?

[Dubious]

It could go a few ways. The simplest would be that we die out but our machines/AI seed other worlds (or try to). Or AI itself may evolve and be the ones to carry on the torch, or perhaps cyborged humans. Or human minds be digitised and the people reconstructed on a safe world, without needing to worry about air, food, heat, cold, toxicity and so forth. There may well be Chinese or Indian arks since their Earthly lifestyles are often easy to improve upon.

In any event, it won't be "us" anymore whether or not we manage to pass the torch to some technological replacement of ourselves. With the way things have been developing that kind of development may not be such a bad thing.

...and if we don't make it in form or another, who cares!

I could not disagree more. With us and our successors comes the story of the entire journey - all those wondrous events and entities and personalities lost to time, all for naught. I can think of little worse.

...and after all those wondrous events and entities, etc., the world is now in a state of such chaos and massive uncertainty not only societally but across the board in every nook and cranny and even the oceans. It feels certain that something major - beyond any diseases or wars we have encountered or caused - is going to blow big-time. If we fail to preempt or screw up that which is so critical to human destiny, it will probably be too late to get smart afterwards, derelict of giving our imagined destiny its due. If that happens it will prove what wondrous imbeciles humans truly are and always were.

That in a billion years or so the earth is doomed to fry is of absolutely no concern if we fail to make it in the next hundred years or two. If that doesn't work out, well then, the universe is very good in recycling leftovers.

It only requires a slight interlude of uncontrollable devastation to erase the rest of time. In that case may the stupid fucker rest in peace and go unacknowledged with hardly an echo of ever having been here.

[Nick_A]

It doesn't make sense to me since we are speaking of different things. You seem to be referring to discoveries within linear time which do not require self consciousness. I am referring to the conscious experience of the relative quality of a moment. This requires being conscious of the self. You don't seem to be aware of what this means so of course we lack communication.

Self-consciousness or awareness is served by conscious experience which also requires time and exposure to what's new and foreign as a catalyst to thought. It doesn't consist of just sitting in an armchair reading Plato or Simone and expecting a revelation to hit you on the head.

Why does real genius incorporate multiple stages of development and becomes a great tragedy, a major loss when terminated by premature death?

Only a small minority have learned how to have conscious experiences. The rest of us live by habit and interpretations following the cycles of earthly existence described in Ecclesiastes 3. That being the case, how can anything be different than it is?

A conscious experience requires self consciousness at the time of the experience. So that you can get an idea of what I am talking about try this ancient experiment.

As you sit in a chair say “it is sitting here.” Save the concept of I for what is watching “it” having the experience. This would be a conscious experience. Since we live by habit and interpretation we are not present during our daily lives and just live as programmed with rare moments of self consciousness

Consider for a moment how everything would be different if people became capable of conscious experiences. Everything would be different and more human. But the world struggles against it conditioned to live by habits and acquired social interpretations so the lack of conscious experiences assures that nothing changes other than in form.

Did Jesus and Socrates die prematurely or exactly when necessary in accordance with the purpose of their lives?

Secular standards may say they died prematurely while universal standards would say no. Those furthering secular standards will do their best to mock universal standards out of existence but fortunately those opening to a universal perspective are not governed by the dictates of the Great Beast and join in pursuing understanding the Beast or society is unaware of.

[Nick_A]

Greta

Humans never started out wanting to be wise, they just wanted to survive. In doing so, they became wiser simply through experience. So it's been throughout history, with various roadblocks here and there. Ultimately, we become wiser because we're more experienced, both individually and as a whole. Thus human stupidity is also a "natural cause". Developing beings will make mistakes along the way, both individually and collectively.

What will follow humans won't be "the ultimate machine" or the ultimate anything. We're still in the universe's infancy so everything in the foreseeable future would be a transitional infant form (which opens up extraordinary possibilities for the future). Unless there are natural limits to a species' progression, the ultimate future in a trillion years or so would seemingly be godlike. I say that as a science fan. Anything that survives the death of their planet, their solar system, even their galaxy is not operating in a way we humans could understand. I have a little speculation that belief in an ultimate deity is based on intuition of what might be possible in the future.

The spark of humanity which has the potential for consciousness is capable of remembering what has been forgotten as to what it means to be human. Plato called it anamnesis. Where animal Man learns by experience, conscious Man learns by awakening. It is through real philosophy and the essence of religion that remembrance becomes possible. Without it human future is restricted to the mechanics you describe. Jacob Needleman writes of it in the following:

From Jacob Needleman’s book: “The heart of Philosophy.” .
Chapter 1

Introduction

Man cannot live without philosophy. This is not a figure of speech but a literal fact that will be demonstrated in this book. There is a yearning in the heart that is nourished only by real philosophy and without this nourishment man dies as surely as if he were deprived of food and air. But this part of the human psyche is not known or honored in our culture. When it does breakthrough to our awareness it is either ignored or treated as something else. It is given wrong names; it is not cared for; it is crushed. And eventually, it may withdraw altogether, never again to appear. When this happens man becomes a thing. No matter what he accomplishes or experiences, no matter what happiness he experiences or what service he performs, he has in fact lost his real possibility. He is dead.

……………………….The function of philosophy in human life is to help Man remember. It has no other task. And anything that calls itself philosophy which does not serve this function is simply not philosophy……………………………….

Ultimately, this is what everyone wants - to conquer suffering, or at least to cope with it with calm and equanimity, to be "above" our troubles. However, people disagree as to how that goal is best achieved, and often don't take into account individual differences, aptitudes or tendencies with their one-size-fits-all prescriptions.

As the Buddha said, life is suffering. The reason I am Christian is because it understands human possibility within this condition. Rather than avoidance, a Christian consciously experiences suffering which invites help from above in the cause of conscious evolution.

“The supernatural greatness of Christianity lies in the fact that it does not seek a supernatural remedy for suffering but a supernatural use for it.” Simone Weil

Anyone understanding what Simone Weil wrote can understand the purpose of the Crucifixion

[Greta]

In any event, it won't be "us" anymore whether or not we manage to pass the torch to some technological replacement of ourselves. With the way things have been developing that kind of development may not be such a bad thing.

...and if we don't make it in form or another, who cares!

I could not disagree more. With us and our successors comes the story of the entire journey - all those wondrous events and entities and personalities lost to time, all for naught. I can think of little worse.

...and after all those wondrous events and entities, etc., the world is now in a state of such chaos and massive uncertainty not only societally but across the board in every nook and cranny and even the oceans. It feels certain that something major - beyond any diseases or wars we have encountered or caused - is going to blow big-time. If we fail to preempt or screw up that which is so critical to human destiny, it will probably be too late to get smart afterwards, derelict of giving our imagined destiny its due. If that happens it will prove what wondrous imbeciles humans truly are and always were.

That in a billion years or so the earth is doomed to fry is of absolutely no concern if we fail to make it in the next hundred years or two. If that doesn't work out, well then, the universe is very good in recycling leftovers.

It only requires a slight interlude of uncontrollable devastation to erase the rest of time. In that case may the stupid fucker rest in peace and go unacknowledged with hardly an echo of ever having been here.

Yes, something huge is building - the Holocene Extinction Event brought about by breakdown of ecosystems and rapid climate change. Note that climate change tends not to be a major issue - it's the rate of change that does the damage. When environments change quickly (this included human environments) species find themselves in novel situations to which they are not adapted.

This is what happens. Things break down and change. We are not driving the change, environments have made humanity what it is. The biosphere is changing again and we are clearly the change agents. It's a dirty job, and it clearly is ours. I think it's important not to think of us as separate or a toxic part of nature, but part of larger systems. We flatter ourselves to image that we've transcended or separated from the Earth when we are simply a part of it.

Do you really think that this is the end of everything? The end of all complex life forever? Even if we were wiped everything out there'd be plenty of time for another intelligent species to evolve on our bones.

[Greta]

Greta

Humans never started out wanting to be wise, they just wanted to survive. In doing so, they became wiser simply through experience. So it's been throughout history, with various roadblocks here and there. Ultimately, we become wiser because we're more experienced, both individually and as a whole. Thus human stupidity is also a "natural cause". Developing beings will make mistakes along the way, both individually and collectively.

What will follow humans won't be "the ultimate machine" or the ultimate anything. We're still in the universe's infancy so everything in the foreseeable future would be a transitional infant form (which opens up extraordinary possibilities for the future). Unless there are natural limits to a species' progression, the ultimate future in a trillion years or so would seemingly be godlike. I say that as a science fan. Anything that survives the death of their planet, their solar system, even their galaxy is not operating in a way we humans could understand. I have a little speculation that belief in an ultimate deity is based on intuition of what might be possible in the future.

The spark of humanity which has the potential for consciousness is capable of remembering what has been forgotten as to what it means to be human. Plato called it anamnesis. Where animal Man learns by experience, conscious Man learns by awakening.

That's just your preferred life hack. Many see other paths that work better for them.

Awakening tends to happen naturally via age and experience, especially when the end is close. How can you not become philosophical when considering death? I guess some don't, but that's the definite tendency. It's not about "animal man", because with age often comes a qualitative change, not just a buildup of data. It's the maturing process, and it occurs on all levels for all manner of entities, living and otherwise. For humans, with the maturing process comes philosophy. Not all will embrace that, but many do.

Ultimately, this is what everyone wants - to conquer suffering, or at least to cope with it with calm and equanimity, to be "above" our troubles. However, people disagree as to how that goal is best achieved, and often don't take into account individual differences, aptitudes or tendencies with their one-size-fits-all prescriptions.

As the Buddha said, life is suffering. The reason I am Christian is because it understands human possibility within this condition. Rather than avoidance, a Christian consciously experiences suffering which invites help from above in the cause of conscious evolution.

It's hardly news that suffering is character building. Thus, to conquer suffering requires much character, much more than we shmucks could manage, so we suffer and hopefully learn from it.

If you do not observe the suffering then you cannot escape it. Part of the process of conquering suffering is understanding it. Running from it is incident handling, not problem solving. If a Christian is so in love with their religion that they despise and disregard all else without inspection, they won't notice or appreciate other growth conduits.

Philosophy does not need Christianity any more than modern jazz needs Dixieland influences. If you look closely you will see in modern jazz the seeds laid by Dixieland, but the paths taken since have moved on to new, more complex and deeply probing musical ideas. What philosophy needs are open eyes and ears, with minds and emotions as devoid of possible of distracting ideologies and "attitude".

[Davyboi]

I could not disagree more. With us and our successors comes the story of the entire journey - all those wondrous events and entities and personalities lost to time, all for naught. I can think of little worse.

...and after all those wondrous events and entities, etc., the world is now in a state of such chaos and massive uncertainty not only societally but across the board in every nook and cranny and even the oceans. It feels certain that something major - beyond any diseases or wars we have encountered or caused - is going to blow big-time. If we fail to preempt or screw up that which is so critical to human destiny, it will probably be too late to get smart afterwards, derelict of giving our imagined destiny its due. If that happens it will prove what wondrous imbeciles humans truly are and always were.

That in a billion years or so the earth is doomed to fry is of absolutely no concern if we fail to make it in the next hundred years or two. If that doesn't work out, well then, the universe is very good in recycling leftovers.

It only requires a slight interlude of uncontrollable devastation to erase the rest of time. In that case may the stupid fucker rest in peace and go unacknowledged with hardly an echo of ever having been here.

Yes, something huge is building - the Holocene Extinction Event brought about by breakdown of ecosystems and rapid climate change. Note that climate change tends not to be a major issue - it's the rate of change that does the damage. When environments change quickly (this included human environments) species find themselves in novel situations to which they are not adapted.

This is what happens. Things break down and change. We are not driving the change, environments have made humanity what it is. The biosphere is changing again and we are clearly the change agents. It's a dirty job, and it clearly is ours. I think it's important not to think of us as separate or a toxic part of nature, but part of larger systems. We flatter ourselves to image that we've transcended or separated from the Earth when we are simply a part of it.

Do you really think that this is the end of everything? The end of all complex life forever? Even if we were wiped everything out there'd be plenty of time for another intelligent species to evolve on our bones.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks, something huge is on its way! The world's not right is it? Maybe it could be the magnetic poles that are meant to be flipping? It could be a number of things, what ever it is its not good. I'm 42 and as a child I remember summer hot, winter cold..now the seasons are all messed up.. Its not uncommon to have and experience all 4 seasons weather in one day, we our a very fragile plant, and to be honest I think we as humans are pushing our luck!

[Impenitent]

musical interlude

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tNLvNOu9Mw

"Why are we here? Because we're here - Roll the bones..."

-Imp

[Nick_A]

Greta

Humans never started out wanting to be wise, they just wanted to survive. In doing so, they became wiser simply through experience. So it's been throughout history, with various roadblocks here and there. Ultimately, we become wiser because we're more experienced, both individually and as a whole. Thus human stupidity is also a "natural cause". Developing beings will make mistakes along the way, both individually and collectively.

What will follow humans won't be "the ultimate machine" or the ultimate anything. We're still in the universe's infancy so everything in the foreseeable future would be a transitional infant form (which opens up extraordinary possibilities for the future). Unless there are natural limits to a species' progression, the ultimate future in a trillion years or so would seemingly be godlike. I say that as a science fan. Anything that survives the death of their planet, their solar system, even their galaxy is not operating in a way we humans could understand. I have a little speculation that belief in an ultimate deity is based on intuition of what might be possible in the future.

The spark of humanity which has the potential for consciousness is capable of remembering what has been forgotten as to what it means to be human. Plato called it anamnesis. Where animal Man learns by experience, conscious Man learns by awakening.

That's just your preferred life hack. Many see other paths that work better for them.

Awakening tends to happen naturally via age and experience, especially when the end is close. How can you not become philosophical when considering death? I guess some don't, but that's the definite tendency. It's not about "animal man", because with age often comes a qualitative change, not just a buildup of data. It's the maturing process, and it occurs on all levels for all manner of entities, living and otherwise. For humans, with the maturing process comes philosophy. Not all will embrace that, but many do.

Ultimately, this is what everyone wants - to conquer suffering, or at least to cope with it with calm and equanimity, to be "above" our troubles. However, people disagree as to how that goal is best achieved, and often don't take into account individual differences, aptitudes or tendencies with their one-size-fits-all prescriptions.

As the Buddha said, life is suffering. The reason I am Christian is because it understands human possibility within this condition. Rather than avoidance, a Christian consciously experiences suffering which invites help from above in the cause of conscious evolution.

It's hardly news that suffering is character building. Thus, to conquer suffering requires much character, much more than we shmucks could manage, so we suffer and hopefully learn from it.

If you do not observe the suffering then you cannot escape it. Part of the process of conquering suffering is understanding it. Running from it is incident handling, not problem solving. If a Christian is so in love with their religion that they despise and disregard all else without inspection, they won't notice or appreciate other growth conduits.

Philosophy does not need Christianity any more than modern jazz needs Dixieland influences. If you look closely you will see in modern jazz the seeds laid by Dixieland, but the paths taken since have moved on to new, more complex and deeply probing musical ideas. What philosophy needs are open eyes and ears, with minds and emotions as devoid of possible of distracting ideologies and "attitude".

I must admit you've lost me here. Awakening is a conscious change of mind not just the ordinary mechanical change that comes with age.

Philosophy doesn't need Christianity. Both provide the means initially through contemplation to lead to a change of the inner direction of the soul of Man. Normally we are attached to the shadows on the wall and just react to them. The depths of philosophy and the essence of religion inspire a change of inner direction towards the direction of the light as opposed to the shadows. Philosophy as introduced by Plato and esoteric Christianity both inspire this change of inner direction called metanoia. In Christianity it is the beginning of rebirth or the purpose of Christianity. Inwardly turning towards the light is the beginning of awakening. It is the beginning of an experienced rather than indoctrinated attempt at a human perspective

[Greta]

Greta



The spark of humanity which has the potential for consciousness is capable of remembering what has been forgotten as to what it means to be human. Plato called it anamnesis. Where animal Man learns by experience, conscious Man learns by awakening.

That's just your preferred life hack. Many see other paths that work better for them.

Awakening tends to happen naturally via age and experience, especially when the end is close. How can you not become philosophical when considering death? I guess some don't, but that's the definite tendency. It's not about "animal man", because with age often comes a qualitative change, not just a buildup of data. It's the maturing process, and it occurs on all levels for all manner of entities, living and otherwise. For humans, with the maturing process comes philosophy. Not all will embrace that, but many do.

As the Buddha said, life is suffering. The reason I am Christian is because it understands human possibility within this condition. Rather than avoidance, a Christian consciously experiences suffering which invites help from above in the cause of conscious evolution.

It's hardly news that suffering is character building. Thus, to conquer suffering requires much character, much more than we shmucks could manage, so we suffer and hopefully learn from it.

If you do not observe the suffering then you cannot escape it. Part of the process of conquering suffering is understanding it. Running from it is incident handling, not problem solving. If a Christian is so in love with their religion that they despise and disregard all else without inspection, they won't notice or appreciate other growth conduits.

Philosophy does not need Christianity any more than modern jazz needs Dixieland influences. If you look closely you will see in modern jazz the seeds laid by Dixieland, but the paths taken since have moved on to new, more complex and deeply probing musical ideas. What philosophy needs are open eyes and ears, with minds and emotions as devoid of possible of distracting ideologies and "attitude".

I must admit you've lost me here. Awakening is a conscious change of mind not just the ordinary mechanical change that comes with age.

I did not say it was "mechanical". Please read again.

Philosophy doesn't need Christianity. Both provide the means initially through contemplation to lead to a change of the inner direction of the soul of Man. Normally we are attached to the shadows on the wall and just react to them. The depths of philosophy and the essence of religion inspire a change of inner direction towards the direction of the light as opposed to the shadows. Philosophy as introduced by Plato and esoteric Christianity both inspire this change of inner direction called metanoia. In Christianity it is the beginning of rebirth or the purpose of Christianity. Inwardly turning towards the light is the beginning of awakening. It is the beginning of an experienced rather than indoctrinated attempt at a human perspective.

Christianity is just a conduit. It could be philosophy, art, music, sport, any activity or relationship. It could be a moment out in the country. Christianity is optional, not necessary.

The fact is that most people wake up to some extent. What are they waking to? The fact that the world of their senses was a tiny sliver of reality. Personally the Christian approach would be completely useless for me, it's so utterly tainted by corruption, manipulativeness and superstition.

The flaws in the Christian methodology were lain bare by the countless cases of molestation brought to light, kept hidden away by church leaders for decades, at least. If a philosophy or life approach cannot even provide the morality needed to simply allow children to enjoy their childhoods without laying selfish and unhealthy perversions on them, then it is at the very least not a cure-all. Too many have adopted the Christian faith and then behaved atrociously. Simply, in terms of being a conduit towards personal growth in the modern world it's weak medicine, rendered impotent by its ambiguities and subsequent ugly interpretations.

I have rather more faith in nature and humanity than you. While we both see the current situation as fatally flawed, you see it as a need for mystical transformation and I see it as a lack of maturity.

Reality has worked itself out better than we could have conceived thus far over 13.8b years, and I fully expect reality to continue operating far beyond our conceptions. We grasp the mere fringes of what's going on and then figure that we understand. Yet these are early days. The idea of humans understanding the universe is akin to babies understanding ethics and nuclear medicine. We simply don't have the capabilities, but they will grow.

Who can answer the question - what kind of entities will be present in the universe in 50 or 100 billion years' time? Anyone who can't authoritatively know has barely a clue what's really going on with reality.

[TimeSeeker]

I have rather more faith in nature and humanity than you. While we both see the current situation as fatally flawed, you see it as a need for mystical transformation and I see it as a lack of maturity.

Reality has worked itself out better than we could have conceived thus far over 13.8b years, and I fully expect reality to continue operating far beyond our conceptions. We grasp the mere fringes of what's going on and then figure that we understand. Yet these are early days. The idea of humans understanding the universe is akin to babies understanding ethics and nuclear medicine. We simply don't have the capabilities, but they will grow.

Who can answer the question - what kind of entities will be present in the universe in 50 or 100 billion years' time? Anyone who can't authoritatively know has barely a clue what's really going on with reality.

This pretty much covers it. And even the idea that we ever "understand" anything is somewhat questionable.

All that we call 'knowledge' and 'understanding' is us just copying what the universe does. Thanks to science we have been copying nature a whole lot faster in the last 2-300 years.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery...