Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2017 6:57 pm
Okay: before I respond to your response, perhaps we need to clear up a possible misunderstanding that could ensue. We use the word "purpose" two ways: one, the actual function or intention of a thing,
I assume you mean in the same sense as when a factory manufactures a washing machine the finished product has been made for a purpose, ie. washing clothes. I do not believe this definition of "purpose" applies to us (Human Beings). I suppose the closest thing to that that applies to us, and all living things, is what I would call an imperative rather than a purpose and that imperative is to survive and reproduce. That's a biological imperative of course and without it we wouldn't even be here. Just to be clear, I don't feel any moral obligation to obey that imperative, even though in fact, I have.
So a person can decide what she will "purpose" (sense 2) to do in her life,
Yes, this is the type of purpose I am talking about.
but the one thing they cannot have, if they are only here by cosmic accident, is a genuine type 1 purpose. Because, they don't actually exist for any reason, by definition of what an "accident" means.
Well I certainly don't feel I have a "genuine type one purpose" and it's absence doesn't seem to cause me any kind of anxiety, existential angst (
) or any other negative feelings, of course I can't speak for anyone else but it seems unlikely that this only applies to me.
So whatever they imagine, it's just a delusion.
Anyone who imagines they have objective purpose in the World/Universe/God's creation is suffering a delusion, yes, I believe so.
They tell themselves they have purpose, because they're not courageous enough to be what he calls "the absurd hero," and to face up to the ultimate meaninglessness and purposeless of existence, he says.
I personally don't have a problem with not having any type one purpose but I can see the value in having type two purpose, even though I don't have that either. I imagine I may well be happier if I did feel a sense of purpose, albeit a self imposed one, but I don't see where courage comes into it. Not having purpose doesn't make me feel afraid, just aimless.
And if there is no Creator, then Camus is right. Inventing a "purpose" or "meaning," is inauthentic, dishonest, and self-deluding,
I don't see what's dishonest about it, or at least it doesn't have to be dishonest. One could do voluntary work for a charity because it gives one a personal sense of purpose, in the full knowledge that it is entirely a subjective matter for oneself, what would be dishonest about that? If I were feeling confrontational I may well point out that inventing a Creator is rather dishonest, but I'm not, so I won't.
in that case, and will only form an illusionary barrier between the "condemned to be free" (Sartre) agent and the true reality he or she inhabits, limiting his or her ability to choose freely. It would be the opiate of the Atheist.
I'm afraid your intellectual superiority has got the better of me here, IC, I can't respond to this because I have no idea what it means. All I can say about it is that it is similar to the Marx quote about religion being the opium of the masses, or something like that.
