Philosophy

[Age]

Are you REALLY and Truly SUGGESTING that "henry quirk" ACTUALLY BELIEVES without a shadow of a doubt that there exists some PERSON, who is male gendered, and who has "his" own agendas, who lived BEFORE this Universe BEGAN, and one of those agendas was building a determined universe then, perhaps perversely, plunkin' little, limited versions of Himself (free wills/agents) down into that universe?

Yes, I ACTUALLY BELIEVE, without a shadow of doubt, a Person built the universe then plunked down little versions of Himself into that universe. Yes, siree, I do.

WOW, well there is a first

You, of course, can dismiss this as fantasy and believe whatever you like.

But I do not believe, nor disbelieve, any thing.

It does not seem to me God cares, and -- sure as hell -- I don't.

But God does care.

God cares that little free willy beings have stooped so low to BELIEVE such things as this.

You were given the ability to freely to choose to believe, or disbelieve, whatever you like, but seriously, 'a person' created the whole Universe?

[Wizard22]

What is the Meaning of Life?

Or, what is my purpose? Today, it's raisin' my kid to be self-directing, self-reliant, and self-responsible. Yesterday, it was sumthin' else. Tomorrow, hell if I know.

I reckon over the course of person's life he takes on, or discovers, or crafts for himself, any number of meanings of life.

It does not seem to me there is one, overarching, meaning of life.

Which value, interest, or drive has been most consistent and constant in your Life, anything?

Does God Exist (and How)?

I think so. As a person with His own agendas. One of those agendas was buildin' a determined universe then, perhaps perversely, plunkin' little, limited versions of Himself (free wills/agents) down into that universe.



What is the Nature of Reality?

Reality is a big, mostly empty, box wherein things and entities exist. Mostly, Reality is a cause & effect affair, a big fat cable made of innumerable causal chains. We, those little, limited versions of the Creator, have the privilege (responsibility?) of bein' able to begin causal chains and to end and bend at least some causal chains.

Why do you link Reality with Causality? Is Causality the basis for Reality?

[Wizard22]

My moral principles are true for me and may well not be true for someone else. My standard of comparison is based on what the person concerned does.

Liberal Christianity is learned as are Islam, Judaism, Republicanism, pride, the Protestant work ethic, Democracy, Socialism, handwriting, computing, world view, mathematics, snobbery, and so on. My notion of what my life means to me is learned, not inherited. I am still learning.

If "the meaning of life" pertains to life as a biological fact "the meaning of life" is nonsense as life is not an entity that seeks or professes meanings.

You should look into Genetics. It's very influential, and may account for much more than you're aware.

Can an apple tree produce grapes? Can a grape fine produce apples? Or, is it in the Nature of thing, to bear its own fruits?

[Harbal]

Can an apple tree produce grapes?

If the apple tree was a grape vine I suppose it could.

[FlashDangerpants]

My moral principles are true for me and may well not be true for someone else.

Pol Pot's moral principles were true for him, but several observers found them lacking.

The word "true" is being used in a way that does not exclude false here, making the whole sentiment worthless.

[Wizard22]

Yes,

So, which one is it?

EVERY time you 'clarify';

Am I to ask you ANOTHER CLARIFYING QUESTION, and so on? Or,

Am I to just ASSUME that you do NOT mean the WHOLE of your "clarification", EVERY time you "clarify"?

Science and Empiricism concerns itself with Objectivity, what requires clarifying exactly?

Have you done any "Science" before? You need to study phenomena and record data. Beliefs, Opinions, Subjectivity is last place. Evidence, and what can be duplicated, shown, is first place. You need to Show your work. I apply this approach, to the Meaning of Life. It's *NOT* a matter of opinion.

SO WHAT, to BOTH of these sentences?

Because you asked, and seem ignorant as to the prospect of any "Objective Reality".

What IS, supposedly, NOT true here?

History is very biased, toward the political bias of the countries and nations that record and produce their "histories". Propaganda is a big problem, with history. It's difficult to be 'objective' about history. Because it means that people must set-aside their socialist and nationalist compulsions. Few people are capable of such. Few people can empathize and understand enemies, and foreign tribes.

LOL So, to you, 'history', itself, can NOT or does NOT so-call 'move forward', unless helped along by SOME human being, or SOME human beings, correct?

My point was that some human beings move the ball forward a great, great distance. And almost all people intuitively recognize these individuals, and such lives, as much "more" meaningful than others.

WHY EXACTLY?

Because SOME so-called "historians" write ONLY about SOME OTHER human beings?

No, because some humans *FLY* while others keep their feet on the ground.

Human achievement cannot be denied.

There may well be SOME 'demonstration' of 'that' (whatever 'that' REALLY IS) to you. But, you might find "yourself" being the ONLY one SEEING ANY thing here.

It's not a matter of consensus.

When some rare person Achieves something great, it's undeniable. Just imagine the first humans who step foot on Mars, or Europa, or Neptune. Are you going deny it? Are you going to naysay it? Are you going to sneer and lift your nose? That other humans achieve more than you? That your nihilistic attitude cannot be impressed by anybody or anything else?

How, EXACTLY, do you ASSUME that 'I' am JUDGING 'thee'?

I don't care.

If you cannot assert or defend any "Meaning of Life", then anybody can simply assume that your life has no meaning. I'm open to that possibility. I will listen to you, if that's what you believe. And, maybe, you're right? If your life is worthless, then make your case. If your life is worth something, then make your case.

I am STILL WAITING for you to CLARIFY:
What does the 'Value of a Life' even mean or refer to, EXACTLY?


And, WHO is, supposedly, doing the 'measuring' of 'that'?

By the way, you LOST 'your bet'. As I ALREADY SAID ABOVE:

I SEE EVERY one's life WORTH the EXACT SAME, or EQUALLY if you so wish.

All organisms demonstrate the value of their life when their lives are danger, and creatures struggle to survive. Because organic life values itself, it then proceeds that such life *might be* meaningful. It's not enough to just survive, though. The point about meaning, is why we survive. To do what? To accomplish what? To be remembered for what?

To claim that "it's all equal", I just doubt that. Prove to me that animals fight "equally" to survive. They don't. Some animals fight harder than others, and they survive. Some humans commit suicide. So, you're clearly and obviously wrong.

Because it is the having the 'want of money', which CORRUPTS, and it is the 'love of money', which is a MAIN CAUSE of WHY 'the human being created world' is in the DREADFUL shape that it is IN, in the days when this is being written, and on that STEEP and SHARP DOWNHILL SPIRAL or CURVE, that 'you' are ALL IN.

Why keep your money, if your life is "Equal" to that stranger?

But 'money' has absolutely NOTHING WHATSOEVER AT ALL to do with the EQUALITY of human beings.

That's your opinion; but life has value. The life of one person maybe a million dollars, another, a billion dollars, another, a few dollars. People measure each-other according to such values.

So, again, you're clearly wrong that there is any kind of "Equality" in humanity. There is NONE. Literally NOBODY treats each-other "Equally".

It does NOT.

And, if 'you', adult human beings, did NOT have 'the LOVE of money', then there would NOT be 'a world' WHERE human beings are DYING, just because they are hungry or thirsty.

But if you PHRASE YOUR CLARIFYING QUESTION, ANOTHER WAY, then I WILL answer what 'it' IS that you are SEEKING here.

You should start being honest here.

Your food and eating, takes precedence before others. Admit this, here.

LOL What has that got to do with what the majority of the public will, supposedly, VOTE FOR?

Also, 'debating' people could NOT be MUCH FURTHER from finding out what 'it' is that they would just VOTE FOR.

It's obvious and common sense that people do not treat Life "equally".

I NEVER said 'you', people, do.

In fact, from what I have OBSERVED and WITNESSED 'you', people, CERTAINLY DO NOT TREAT each other EQUALLY, let alone other life forms.

So if there is not *ONE* instance of Life treating Life equally...then why base your beliefs in something that is clearly NOT true, never was, and never will be? There is not *ONE* instance of Life being "equal".

Let's use an example. There are identical twins. Are their lives "equal"? No, they're not.

Not that I recall.

Perhaps I'll need to rewind this thread and see where you asked and I answered...?

Okay, we WILL WAIT.[/quote]
Fine with me.

I'll simply cut to the chase here. People act as-if Life has meaning.

HOW EXACTLY?

Because people fight viciously, to survive. Animals, fight viciously, to survive. If Life had no Meaning, then nobody would fight to Survive.

Nobody would Survive, without Purpose.

WHY do you ADD the 'value' word in your replies when talking about 'meaning', and vice-versa, ADD the 'meaning' word in your replies when talking about 'values'?

Meaning proceeds from Value.

You feed yourself.

SO WHAT?

And, when I am so-called "feeding myself" I ALSO STILL SEE NO more 'value' in ANY one's life OVER another's life.

Your opinion doesn't matter. By feeding yourself, you ACT as though your life has more value than another's.

Have you ever eaten meat once in your life? Of course you have. So your actions speak louder than words.

The genetic make-up of the body has HAD CONTROL over this BEFORE views even BEGAN within this body.

So Meaning maybe genetic, right???

Yes I COULD. I COULD also do what IS ACTUALLY Right, and help in CHANGING 'the human being created world' so that NO MORE human beings DIE of STARVATION and/or THIRST just because SOME adult human beings are TOO SELFISH and TOO GREEDY to SHARE.

What about your own "GREED"?

EVERY adult human being HAS so-called 'degrees of selfishness, AND selflessness', but instead of MINIMAZING the Wrong being done, let us just LOOK AT thee ACTUAL Truth ALONE. That is; EVERY adult human being IS GREEDY and SELFISH.

By the way, 'bodies' are NOT 'selfish' in ANY degree. ONLY 'you', adult human beings, ARE.

Bodies aren't selfish??? Whaaaaat?!

That adult human beings are GREEDY and SELFISH, and ALLOW OTHER human beings to just DROP DEAD because food and/or water is KEPT FROM them, is Truly OBVIOUS, and a VERY SIMPLY and EASILY RECOGNIZABLE Fact. However, you wrote:

"At the very least, a person subjectively places his/her own life as much more valuable than those of strangers."

To which I replied:

WHY do you do this?

I do NOT do this.

That human beings are ALLOWED to DIE, who could be SAVED, was NEVER in QUESTION.

I was QUESTIONING WHY do 'you', subjectively, place 'your' OWN life as being, supposedly, much more valuable than the lives of other human beings who you have NOT, personally, met?

Adults are to blame, but not children? Why are children blameless? Yes, I admit to placing myself before others, when I eat. Yes, it's common sense. Selfishness is not absolute though.

Being 'born' EQUAL does NOT EQUATE to, necessarily, 'dying' EQUAL.

Also, because you were brought up to BELIEVE and ACCEPT that NOT ALL ARE EQUAL, you WILL live YOUR LIFE 'that way', and thus TREAT people NOT EQUALLY. As can be CLEARLY WITNESSED and SEEN by YOUR INACTIONS in just HELPING "others" to STAY ALIVE and SURVIVE, by WITHOLDING food and/or water, FROM THEM. That in the days when this was being written, there WAS INEQUITY, is A PROVABLE, and an IRREFUTABLE, Fact.

But just because you do NOT BEHAVE in a way that SHOWS EQUALITY, that in itself does NOT mean that Life, itself, IS NOT EQUAL. That just means that 'you', human beings, have grown up to NOT CARE for NOR about "others".

Don't I "care for" others more than you, because I believe in Inequality?

How can you care for other people when you lie to them?

It is in the very HEART, or CENTER, of 'life', itself.

Life does not have a center?

'Money' is a completely UNNECESSARY part of 'life', and living, and does NOT even come into the EQUATION, here.

I disagree, money is necessary, now more than ever before. People need a medium for trade; it's efficient.

Because sometimes a person trying to save somebody's life, fails, and wastes his own life trying.

Even selflessness has faults. It doesn't automatically make somebody Righteous, even though they might believe it.

I am NOT sure what so-called "Righteous" has to 'investigate' in relation to WHAT HAPPENED.

Because people are duped by Righteousness all the time. People believe they are doing something 'Right', but, it turns out, they were merely pawns to another's political ambition, a tool, a dupe.

You DO care, otherwise you wouldn't have asked.

But that reply of mine was NOT in regards to the question I asked you but in regards to your remark about:
Hubris, for example, most people act as though Ignorance and Bravado, fakery and sophistry, are more valuable than Philosophy. So in that, I disagree with most.

You can be dishonest, if you like, but that's your own prerogative.

What do you think I am being DISHONEST about here, EXACTLY?

Because you wouldn't have asked, if you didn't care.

I would agree with sex organs, but also go further and argue for Chromosomes. Male and Female is genetic, and cannot be lied about on the genetic level.

I think you might that 'this', itself, is NOT absolutely True.

How are Chromosomes not "absolutely true"?

You can't "fake" having an 'XX' or 'XY' chromosome. Your blood cannot fake a blood test.

No, it's not a matter of Subjective belief. I believe I already stated that. It's not *ONLY* up to me, regarding my Meaning of Life, or meaning IN life. Other people account for it, and then there's Objective Reality, the probability that some exceptional actions or methods or deeds in life maybe MORE meaningful than others.

So, if 'me' and "others" state that 'your' 'life' "wizard22" is meaningless, 'we' account for what the truth is here correct?

You can certainly argue and rationalize, persuade others, but that doesn't mean it's objectively true or real.

I don't mind, go ahead. I enjoy argument and debate, philosophical discussion and the like. Be honest, with me, with yourself, with others.

So, EVERY one who drinks alcohol, which has NOT been prescribed through 'an accurate medical prescription', (whatever that may be), is then a 'drug-abuser', right?

To the degree they over-indulge themselves, yes.

So, HOW, EXACTLY, did these provide an admission?

Because drug-addicts say "Life is Meaningless" and especially "my life is meaningless". They're not proud of their self-destruction.

So, when you are HERE, IN Existence, are you REALLY NOT able to perceive NOR be aware of Existence.

To the degree my senses and intellectual acuity allow for, I perceive.

So, to you, 'political propaganda' has been around LONGER than human beings, themselves, correct?

AS long as, not longer than. Humans have always had a 'Mythos', which is the basis of propaganda.

You, ONCE AGAIN, appear to NOT be READING the ACTUAL WORDS 'I' put BEFORE 'you'.

I'm pretty sure that I'm addressing 99% of what you're saying.

You have LOST me, AGAIN, here.

The point was, if somebody Lies about God, the nature of Divinity, then those who believe from there, are also Lies. The greater point, is that people can be duped into Life, and Meaning, which are based on Lies/Falsity.

Okay, but; Have you NOT been fed Lies and Falsities, or are you ABLE TO SEE THROUGH ALL of the ones that you have been fed?

I've seen through a LOT, but I would not say "all".

[Wizard22]

1. What is the Meaning of Life?

There isn’t any.

2. Does God Exist (and How)?

NO, except as concept.

3. What is the Nature of Reality?

Illusory.

I believe that when Nihilists are put in life-and-death situations, their Actions speak louder than Words.

They show, in their actions, that their lives, and the lives of others, do matter, and therefore, are meaningful.

[Wizard22]

1. Life = not dead.
2. In the minds of scared and deluded people.
3. Nature is as Nature does.

Is there more to life than "merely surviving"?

[Wizard22]

Can an apple tree produce grapes?

If the apple tree was a grape vine I suppose it could.

That's not what I asked though...

[Wizard22]

Scientifically and Objectively, the Meaning of Life can be measured by the 'Value' of a Life. People place subjective values onto Life. One person's life is worth more or less than another. For example, a very old man's life is (publicly agreed upon) worth less than an infant or child's life. Most people claim this. Or, if you want money values, then look into Health insurance and Life insurance policies. Economically, it is obvious and visible that some lives are worth "more" or less than others. Here, a Liberal will step-in and claim "All Life has Equal Value", but this is simply not practiced in reality. At the very least, a person subjectively places his/her own life as much more valuable than those of strangers. In some circumstances, a person may sacrifice his/her own life for immediate family, or for strangers in emergency circumstances, but this is Rare and less Common. Thus self-sacrifice needs to be investigated.

Having said all this, I personally value Wisdom, Insight, Trust, and Philosophy. I find these things meaningful and valuable, for myself, but understand that most people may not feel the same way, and tend not. Hubris, for example, most people act as though Ignorance and Bravado, fakery and sophistry, are more valuable than Philosophy. So in that, I disagree with most.

By the way, Age, here is where I answered about Meaning of Life.

You should do better in paying attention to what is written.

You accused me of not answering, but I clearly did...

[Harbal]

That's not what I asked though...

I am not responsible for the question.

[Wizard22]

It seems to me that the "Nature of Things" DO NOT CHANGE over time.

An apple tree cannot produce grapes; a grape vine cannot produce apples.

And it is a folly to imply otherwise.


Do you disagree?

[Belinda]

My moral principles are true for me and may well not be true for someone else.

Pol Pot's moral principles were true for him, but several observers found them lacking.

The word "true" is being used in a way that does not exclude false here, making the whole sentiment worthless.

Yes but the culture of Pol Pot was wrong. Our liberal post-Christian moral structure is opposed to that of Pol Pot and others like it. My moral principles are those I learned from the culture where my learning happened. There has been research into the very young child's moral principles. Very young children we can assume are too young to have learned/understood any codified moral principles yet they have the instinctive knowledge, or feeling, that unfairness is wrong.

Based on the theory of Noam Chomsky about 'instinctive' knowledge of language structure (but not of course specific languages such as English or French) it seems there is a base of 'instinctive' cognition that's comparable to the base of physical structure such that humans are among the large group of animals that are vertically symmetrical. However within that overall vertical symmetry there's lot of scope for variety.

And similarly within a general frame of what is possible for humans to know 'instinctively' there is a lot of scope for variety. For instance in our own liberal cultures there are differences between socialists and conservatives yet few of these politicians are criminals or otherwise extremely antisocial.

[Harbal]

It seems to me that the "Nature of Things" DO NOT CHANGE over time.

An apple tree cannot produce grapes; a grape vine cannot produce apples.

And it is a folly to imply otherwise.


Do you disagree?

I don't think I agree that "Nature of Things" DO NOT CHANGE over time". It seems to me that the nature of something could change over time.

[Harbal]

I pose to you all three "simple" questions:


1. What is the Meaning of Life?

2. Does God Exist (and How)?

3. What is the Nature of Reality?

The only sensible answer to all three would be, I don't know.