Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ruminating on this and being sad for more than a few passing moments is to waste time you can't get back. Look outward, not inward, and you might get a much greater appreciation for the fact that you're even here in the first place.
Well Said!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
Yes. I would indeed be "Sad" as any who have the staggeringly marvellous universe that we live in to know about and not think it "Awesome". Which doesn't go as far as "worshipful" of course, since all our propitiation by prayer, adoration, faith - belief in this, that or the other thing, tithes or sacrifices, wouldn't make a molecules' worth of difference to it (1).
Which is why I call myself a naturalist materialist humanist skeptical agnostic atheist. Not every time, of course, and not a Pantheist.
(1) anti -theist apologetics caveat - so far as we know, as regards sound logical assessment of all the valid evidence.
Yes, this too!!
I think I call myself a Naturalist Minimalist Quaker Unitarian Agnostic, sometimes all at once, other times Ala-Carte.
Ya know Transponder, neither one of us can get one of those veiled threat "I Vote" bumper stickers as they simply will not fit on the car...
"I'm A Naturalist Materialist Humanist Skeptical Agnostic Atheist And I Vote!!
"I'm A Naturalist Minimalist Quaker Unitarian Agnostic And I Vote!!
Actually mine has a slightly better chance of fitting...
There is no way you truly think that is awesome. You and I both know it to be the truth, but (presumptuously, on my part) neither you nor I think it is awesome. Unless you're as delusional as the theists you commonly denigrate on this forum. I can say the prior sentence (clause, actually--not even a sentence) with confidence because I know what makes humans tick, psychologically (and very generally)--and it is not the idea that their multiple steps of organic/atomic decomposition involve being food for worms and then atoms to be interchanged with all the generic-and-uncountable/untrackable atoms of the universe. Never has a depressed human received a psychological boost by thinking in these terms.
The continued reproduction/replication of human life is predicated on self-deception (or collectively effective mass delusion). Nihilists are 'righteously' but unceremoniously impotent.
The fundamental question "is life worth it" begs the question "to whom and in what context and from what perspective". Personally and subjectively, absent lots of dumb luck I would answer no. As you approach the species level and an objective assessment and a longer than human lifespan timeframe, the answer gradually becomes yes, by my lights at any rate.
I don't know that its fair to characterize as "delusional" the notion that life is awesome from any perspective. It's delusional from some, illusory from others, and reasonable from still others.
I don't think its delusional to deliberately decide not to go to certain dark places. It is simply pragmatic.
A perfect example is that I got a call from my daughter yesterday and spent the better part of an hour on the phone with her. Which should I focus on, let's see:
* As usual the conversation was 98% about her and she didn't ask one thing about what's going on with me or how I feel about it. Because she could care less.
* It was a belated father's day call and made only because my wife goosed her and put her up to it.
* Part of the conversation was about worrying developments with one of her boys.
* Despite that she continues to drop hints that life is financially difficult for her and she could really use some help, she just bought, and is actively gloating on social media about, a 3600 sq ft house which they are populating with new furniture.
Yeah, I could, and at times have, focussed on that. But I can also choose to focus on:
* She's okay and doing well, which at least I don't have to worry about.
* She's industrious, assertive, organized, and honest (about most things), unaddicted, etc.
* Her son's issues are not my problem and it's one thing at least that she's not trying to make my problem. I care about him as my grandson of course but as a grandparent its not my job to fret about his existential wellbeing.
* SHE is not my problem anymore and it doesn't matter on a day to day basis that she is a bit of a BS generator because she's a discrete 1,000 miles away.
So yes, I focus on the latter set of thoughts, and at times, average the two aspects together and decide that for me at least it's a net positive. Therefore, regarding raising her as a sunk cost, at present my daughter contributes more to my life than she subtracts from it. And she's not a real source of worry, although I'm ambivalent about some of my contact with her because she has some narcissistic tendencies that limit the quality of our relationship or how close I'd wish it to be.
The point though is that I could be in a dark funk about that call or just enjoy that I got a call from a reasonably functional child and that it went well.
Everything about life is that way. Call it delusional if you want, but I call it pragmatic to choose to pay lots more attention to positives in life than to negatives AND to have realistic expectations about what life provides. If you want to subjectively feel good, it's a choice that's open to you. It requires some work and practice admittedly but I have decided it's better in the long run than feeling like crap about life all the time.
Not particularly, yours perhaps but not mine perhaps because I have spent most of my life defining my own personal meaning. One that I am still working on despite the fact that it is late in the fourth quarter and the clock is ticking, faster than I once imagined. But that in itself gives life meaning, trying to find it or at leas carve meaning out of nothing.
06-28-2016, 04:01 AM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman07
Meaning in the long term. Meaning after us and the earth no longer exists and every trace of us and the earth no longer exist.
Yep, there is none - get used to it. The only meaning you'll have is for the here and now.
I recently had a (very one-sided) conversation with the ants in my backyard about how futile and pointless it was for them to keep building antpiles in my yard....knowing full well I would eradicate them from existence. I wondered...what meaning or legacy could they possibly be after? And how would they accomplish it if I completely eradicate all traces of them?
Yet that doesn't stop the next wave of ants, or even other life, from trying to inhabit my yard. It seems they make their own meaning, as the previous ants did, in spite of such futility.
This is an excellent analogy and one I've thought about myself. I wonder why most humans are not grateful to have this chance to live. Through billions of years of natural evolution and cosmic accidents, here we are living as intelligent and conscious beings on a tiny world in the universe.
Most of us who are lucky to live in western countries enjoy a level of prosperity, health, peace, freedom of movement and knowledge that was unimaginable to humans in centuries past. There is no reason at all why we even had to be here, and yet some people think it is sad that we don't get to live forever? Yeah, get real.
This is an excellent analogy and one I've thought about myself. I wonder why most humans are not grateful to have this chance to live. Through billions of years of natural evolution and cosmic accidents, here we are living as intelligent and conscious beings on a tiny world in the universe.
Well the answer of course is that ants exist at a low enough level of awareness that they probably get their jollies entirely from the journey rather than the destination.
Which is what some people advocate for humans -- to selectively tamp down their awareness and be more like ants, effectively. I both agree and disagree with this. I agree because pragmatically speaking our self awareness has outstripped our ability to cope with it. I disagree because you can't really wish away your self awareness. Sometimes I trick myself into ignoring the past and the future but the reality of the human condition is that I'm actually quite aware of both, and of the story arc of my life, and how it will end. If I weren't, I wouldn't be human.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer
Most of us who are lucky to live in western countries enjoy a level of prosperity, health, peace, freedom of movement and knowledge that was unimaginable to humans in centuries past. There is no reason at all why we even had to be here, and yet some people think it is sad that we don't get to live forever? Yeah, get real.
That is the real crux of the matter. Life isn't devalued at ALL by being finite. In many ways its value is INCREASED by its finitude. But the warped thinking of many religious faiths have convinced people to be greedy in this regard, and it causes a lot of human suffering. It's so pervasive that even some unbelievers struggle with it. It's disordered thinking.
Life, meaning and purpose are for the living, not the dead. That is true at both the individual and species levels.
Well the answer of course is that ants exist at a low enough level of awareness that they probably get their jollies entirely from the journey rather than the destination.
While the awareness of our mortality is the key distinction between us and the ants (in the analogy)....does having that awareness necessitate a level of ignorance (or illusory distraction), in order to (for lack of better phrasing) even bother?
Because I don't think many of us (namely atheists) do. We might not focus on our mortality, or keep it top of mind, but I suspect it isn't intentional nor do we delude (as you said earlier) ourselves into believing we are somehow immortalized.
So while our rationalizations and motivations are much more complex (and convoluted), I suspect we do as the ants in that we simply say....what then to do?
While the awareness of our mortality is the key distinction between us and the ants (in the analogy)....does having that awareness necessitate a level of ignorance (or illusory distraction), in order to (for lack of better phrasing) even bother?
Because I don't think many of us (namely atheists) do. We might not focus on our mortality, or keep it top of mind, but I suspect it isn't intentional nor do we delude (as you said earlier) ourselves into believing we are somehow immortalized.
So while our rationalizations and motivations are much more complex (and convoluted), I suspect we do as the ants in that we simply say....what then to do?
More or less.
I think our self awareness is both helpful and unhelpful. Our awareness of a story arc to our life allows us both to anticipate achieving goals or attaining positive milestones, but also to dread the things that we fear ... such as sickness, accident, and of course, death. It allows us to "relive" both good and bad experiences in our past. Survival instincts also tend to make us more prone to notice / avoid negatives than to fully experience positives. To give negative experiences more weight.
So to me it is mostly a matter of training one's mental and emotional focus on positive experiences -- and also to let go of things that we have no control over.
I think our self awareness is both helpful and unhelpful. Our awareness of a story arc to our life allows us both to anticipate achieving goals or attaining positive milestones, but also to dread the things that we fear ... such as sickness, accident, and of course, death. It allows us to "relive" both good and bad experiences in our past. Survival instincts also tend to make us more prone to notice / avoid negatives than to fully experience positives. To give negative experiences more weight.
So to me it is mostly a matter of training one's mental and emotional focus on positive experiences -- and also to let go of things that we have no control over.
That self-awareness is also key to identifying existential threats that aren't as obvious to other species. So it may be for good (evolutionary) reason that we have it.
It is interesting to observe (perhaps with some confirmation bias) that those who could not cope with the self-awareness may not have procreated as much as those who could. But in today's world, it seems to me coping is less desirable in favor of outright avoidance. Obviously that's good when it comes to avoiding imminent harms....but I do wonder if we're less able to cope with newer existential threats, and thus choose to avoid them, even if we ought to address them.
That self-awareness is also key to identifying existential threats that aren't as obvious to other species. So it may be for good (evolutionary) reason that we have it.
Natural selection has resulted in a particular range or amplitude of self awareness that, crudely, by causing us to be hyper-aware of potential hazards, results in higher probability of survival to pass on one's genes. We generally call this confirmation bias and agency inference. The bushes rustle and we run and ask questions later. The side effect of this is our sense of awe in the presence of the vast and/or ancient, our sense that there is "something more" or "we are not alone", which feeds into and sustains religious narratives. And causes us to overreact or have unreasoning fears of more prosaic things such as fear of the dark.
So the self awareness provided by natural selection has become more of a burden than a boon in modern world, where we are in direct control of a lot of our environment and its stressors, have reserves of food and other resources, and a civil society that reliably provides social reciprocity. We have to work to override some aspects of our self awareness and cultivate others. Most of it amounts to impulse control and training the mind in healthy skepticism and rationalism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinEden99
It is interesting to observe (perhaps with some confirmation bias) that those who could not cope with the self-awareness may not have procreated as much as those who could. But in today's world, it seems to me coping is less desirable in favor of outright avoidance. Obviously that's good when it comes to avoiding imminent harms....but I do wonder if we're less able to cope with newer existential threats, and thus choose to avoid them, even if we ought to address them.
I think most of these quirks in our mental landscape that we're talking about don't have a direct and immediate impact on survival to reproduce. Remember that natural selection begins and ends with survival, and doesn't really impact thriving, enjoyment, or other subjective pleasures like self-actualization. I would suspect that avoidance of perceived but less than immanent threats, or active "tilting at windmills" when people actively fight things that aren't actual threats or chase things that aren't actual boons, simply influences people's level of contentment and enjoyment of life, or sometimes just shifts anxieties into different contexts. But I doubt that it impacts birth or survival rates enough such that, e.g., more rational thinkers are more that often selected for than more subjective ones. It's tempting to think so, but I'd want to see hard evidence first.
We are both former theists and if we're honest about it we saw that most of our former compatriots survived long enough to pass on their genes, and many of them were not actively and consciously unhappy in the process either. WE were, and many others are, and that is what motivates a reassessment of one's beliefs. But I don't see survival long enough to conceive progeny as being hugely impacted one way or the other.
If anything you can argue that since skepticism, naturalism, rationalism, atheism, empiricism tend to be associated with education and wealth, and the educated / wealthy tend to reproduce LESS, that the short term impact of the rise of the nones is apt to be natural selection in favor of the religious! The good news though is that higher education is pretty much required to thrive in the modern world, and the trend is toward effectively compulsory and free higher education, just as free and compulsory K-12 education became the norm generations ago. Education undermines religious faith, generates wealth, and so natural selection in the memesphere, if I may coin a term, is overwhelming conventional natural selection of individuals.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
