Philosophy Now Forum

Phrased twice because I'm drunk:

Is it better to live a short life filled almost only of what you love or a long life filled with more of what you hate?

Is it better to live a shorter life filled mostly with the things that you love or a longer life filled with more of the things that you hate most?

neither. it's best to not have existed at all. the next best thing is to exist eternally (or believe that you'll exist eternally) in pure pleasure, happiness, fulfillment, etc.. anything other than these two is pure crap.

Bitch. You know that ain't true.

Jaded Sage wrote:Bitch. You know that ain't true.

you're the bitch, and it is true.

alpha wrote:neither. it's best to not have existed at all.

What is it, then, that did not exist at all? Does it have a name? Is it "you?" What does it even mean to imagine that one has never existed? It's a contradiction. You have to exist in order to even ask the question. Some guy named Descartes said something about this. "I think therefore I am." Actually he said it in French. The French are always saying clever things like that.

wtf wrote:

alpha wrote:neither. it's best to not have existed at all.

What is it, then, that did not exist at all? Does it have a name? Is it "you?" What does it even mean to imagine that one has never existed? It's a contradiction. You have to exist in order to even ask the question. Some guy named Descartes said something about this. "I think therefore I am." Actually he said it in French. The French are always saying clever things like that.

if you like the french so much, i refer you to laplace's demon (simon laplace). anyway, when one doesn't exist, he needn't imagine anything, or ask any questions. personally, i'd prefer if reality was "i don't think, therefor i'm not".

If an entity can identify itself and be aware of itself thinking, there is a better than even chance that it does exist. So what? Rocks, ringworm and mould exist, but nobody pays them much attention, until they fall on, infest and colonize people.

Longer and shorter; almost only and more of; love and hate.
If those are the available choices, get another life. Something a little more varied and nuanced.

Sorry for saying, "bitch." I was drunk as fuck.

Skip, do you answer this way because the answer is too obvious?

alpha wrote: "i don't think, therefor i'm not".

Tell me you've seen I Heart Huckabees. You'll laugh your existential ass off. Plus there's a subtle reference to something called the Son of Man.

Jaded Sage wrote:

alpha wrote: "i don't think, therefor i'm not".

Tell me you've seen I Heart Huckabees. You'll laugh your existential ass off. Plus there's a subtle reference to something called the Son of Man.

i think i've seen the beginning, but didn't like it. what's this "son of man" thing?

alpha wrote:

Jaded Sage wrote:

alpha wrote: "i don't think, therefor i'm not".

Tell me you've seen I Heart Huckabees. You'll laugh your existential ass off. Plus there's a subtle reference to something called the Son of Man.

i think i've seen the beginning, but didn't like it. what's this "son of man" thing?

http://youtu.be/hSdrwqLUpD0

People like us, people who come to philosophy forums, might consider some of this pseudo-intellectualism. I say look beyond whatever your opinion of that is, because the movie is saying something very important. See that hat in the background? Right after he gets in he makes a clear reference to a famous work of art. This movie is filled with subtle deep thoughts.

Also I rephrased the question:

to live a short life filled with things you love, or a long life full of what you don't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2IBM7ovgvQ

-Imp

Who doesn't love a musical reply. I know I do. We should start that as a trend around here.

Jaded Sage wrote:Also I rephrased the question:

to live a short life filled with things you love, or a long life full of what you don't.

what's the point of a pleasurable, but short life? why would anyone want a long and painful life?