I am hoping we can discuss our purpose and what equals the good life and what we can achieve.
I am hoping we can discuss our purpose and what equals the good life and what we can achieve.
What is our purpose? |
I am hoping we can discuss our purpose and what equals the good life and what we can achieve.
Happiness is a human concept and synthetic. IMHO, our basic purpose is survival.
Let’s say that for example, Syne is smarter than I am. No-no that’s too unrealistic. Let’s say that he’s stronger and has more endurance than me. He’s able to plow his field better than I am. His crops yield larger and tastier fruits and vegetables than mine. Is he not entitled to eat them? Am I entitled to them? If so, then I am his master, and he—my slave. Hmm…I like it! Okay. Let’s go with that. *sarcasm What if Syne was nice (you’ll have to use your imagination for this)? Imagine Syne deciding to be generous and giving me a few of his apples. Yay! I’m totally happy. Gee, thanks, Syne, but then C C comes over for her usual cup of joe, and shows me the apples that Syne gave her. They’re way bigger and juicer than the ones he gave me. Well, now I’m not so happy. Since he mentioned Viktor Frankl, what Frankl actually said was to put the question (the meaning of life) in general terms would be comparable to the question posed to a chess champion: Tell me, Master, what is the best move in the world? There's simply no such thing as the best or even a good move apart from a particular situation in a game and the particular personality of one’s opponent. The same holds for human existence. One should not search for an abstract meaning of life. He did believe, though that people could suffer through unimaginable horrors through their personal concepts of meaning, rather than happiness itself. The academic performance may be the worst predictor of living a satisfactory life like he said, but Viktor Frankl thought that those who lived a rich intellectual life suffered less internal pain because they were able to escape their surroundings through rich thoughts. Nietzsche saw the mere pursuit of happiness, defined here as that which gives pleasure, as a dull waste of human life. Declaring: "Mankind does not strive for happiness; only the Englishman does", referencing the English philosophy of Utilitarianism, and its focus on total happiness. No offense intended, Stryder, C2. Nietzsche was instead dedicated to the idea of finding meaning in life. He suggested the Ubermensch, and his creation of meaning in life, as an alternative to the Last Man, and offered us the idea of people who were willing to undertake great suffering in the name of a goal they have set, as examples. Can we imagine that Michelangelo found painting the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel pleasant? Nikola Tesla declared that his celibacy was necessary to his work, but complained of his loneliness his entire life. Is that happiness? If these great minds wanted happiness in itself, would they have done what they did? No, says Nietzsche. They would not. Instead, they chose to pursue meaning, and found it. This is what people really want. [1]
60% to 30%
considering that while the 60% was prevailent the 90% didnt know of the 99% of crime that the other 99% of society angaged in. thus a statistic based on a false perception is a false statistic. soo.. i am having a real issue with trying to look past this "factualisation construct". Generically speaking information gives rise to paranoia when fear is taught as the primary leverage point of the unknown and the lack of knowledge. This is modelled to children by their parents. Totally agree with him Re mental illness of competing social classes of childhood mental health. Teaching children to value themselves by comparing themselves against others in a capitalist metaphor is extreemly psychologically damaging. It breeds a base line of psychopathy & self actualisation co-dependency of individuation..
My personal unachievable goal (and therefore purpose) is "complete freedom".
It's something that nobody has ever really had as there is always some sort of hierarchy either dictating terms of your internment or someone trying to move you along with an "invisible handed" shoo. I'd considered the philosophy previously in-depth and rationalised that freedom itself is a worthy pursuit even if it will likely be completely unachievable thanks to all the megalomaniacs and Sociopaths. The point however is that my perspective and rationale will be somewhat different from someone else, that will likely have built an entirely different psychological way of perceiving purpose. (Do we get cleaned up to look good, or cleaned up to not smell bad?) (Aug 7, 2017 03:26 AM)stryder Wrote: My personal unachievable goal (and therefore purpose) is "complete freedom". Objectivism resonates somewhat with me. It advocates putting one’s life above all other values. Ayn Rand said that men should not be considered a sacrificial animal to be immolated for the sake of the 'public good'. That a man has a right to exist for his own sake, but a soldier has to risk his life, or even die if need be. However, freedom is necessary to live a rational life, increase our lifespan, and allow us to pursue our values, which are worth defending. So, it’s not unreasonable to defend liberty. If in fact we are defending liberty. stryder Wrote:Do we get cleaned up to look good, or cleaned up to not smell bad? Men; to not smell bad. Women; both.
or cleaned up to look like we dont smell.
Not sure what it is or if there is one but I do think my purpose is to not worry about having a purpose.
The implication is that of a designer universe or Earth and that I should be deemed satisfactory by some code of conduct should I correctly figure out what my purpose is. I assume some of the most successful at realizing their purpose have been tyrants. If their purpose is fulfilled and you die as a result then I guess dying was your purpose.
thinking of Brian Greenes' documentary, if we were to run life backwards from the point of death, would it make sense ?
probably not. Do we give purpose to reality, or Does Reality give purpose to us ? if your purpose is more than what you do, then err-go, what you do is not your purpose. Thus is purpose a reality or a philisophical dimension of thought ? is the very nature of the premise of thought of purose defined as spiritualism ? When we ask ourselves "do i have a purpose" am i engaging in a philisophical spiritual discussion ? (Aug 7, 2017 11:27 PM)confused2 Wrote: Rule 1 Rule 2 Don’t be a snob! (A snob is anybody who takes a small part of you, and uses that to come to a complete vision of who you are. That is snobbery.) And once again, it’s your turn. You have to come up with Rule #3. "Ultimately, human happiness isn’t the result of any plan or grand strategy. We’re not programmed to be happy. Like all adaptations, it’s the result of countless mutations, over millennia of trial and error. Our happiness is the product of the same forces that created tulips, giraffes, and viruses. It just happened that our chances of survival were enhanced by finding satisfaction in a job well done." What is the evolutionary purpose of happiness? Happiness and early humans Schadenfreude as survival mechanism BTW, the English word for this is epicaricacy. The power of pain The pursuit of happiness "We should focus in on our ideas, and make sure that we own them; that we are truly the authors of our own ambitions. Because it's bad enough not getting what you want, but it's even worse to have an idea of what it is you want, and find out, at the end of the journey, that it isn't, in fact, what you wanted all along."—Alain de Botton |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|