The 'What Does it All Mean?' Thread

[westwall]

Because everything points in that direction from a logic perspective in my reality. I see "cause and effect" in the universe around me and I understand that in reality, there is a reason for everything. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Therefore, purpose must relate to cause. If this reality exists, if life exists, if our minds, imaginations, etc., all exist... there must be a reason.

We didn't wake up this morning floating out into space, talking about how "gravity" decided to take the day off... just wasn't feeling the cosmic energy today or something... so here we are, stuck in a day without gravity! Nope... it worked today the same as it has worked since the beginning of the universe. Why do we assume it has to? Well... maybe because if it didn't, we'd really be up shit creek? It actually HAS to exist for "exist" to have relevant meaning.

Physics has been one of our most powerful tools. It has given us broad understanding of the mechanics of our physical universe, but it is currently on the brink of completely uncharted territory. If what some theorize is true, "reality" could exist in millions or billions of forms. One theoretical physicist drew laughter from the line, "it's possible a universe could exist where Elvis is still alive!" But seriously, we don't know what secrets lie in the cosmos.

Again... back on point... I can't wrap my mind around the idea that this is all for nothing and has no real reason or purpose because that doesn't make sense to me.

Really? Why? People are born, grow old and die every single day. Some live long lives thanks to their genetics, some live short lives. Some die from doing stupid dangerous things, some don't. Good people die of dread diseases every minute of every day, while vile, evil, people live out their scumbag existences preying on the good people around them.

If you see logic amongst that, then I need to know what your smokin'.

So, according to boss, an unknowable, unfathomable god (which theists slather with various human attributes), has a plan for us. Let’s see the preponderance of evidence, and let's apply critical thinking to it and see if it withstands scrutiny. As a matter of course, everything that is delineated in appeals to gods we must also (in order to be fair and impartial) hold supernaturalism against by way of standard.

It all becomes completely harmonious when you take the gods out of the equation. No issues at all -- not a single paradox. We have free will, we write our own destiny as we move through linear time, we are responsible for the kind of world we live in, the "plan" is within our hands and is imperfect because we are imperfect, and thus changes-- exactly as it is playing out -- I'd say all concerns are satisfied once you abdicate the notion that there's a "guiding intelligence" from a supernatural realm involved with our existence.

An unhealthy fascination with supernatural realms is cause for concern.

No, it's not. It's only unhealthy when they mandate that we must listen to them and believe. What people wish to do in their own head, and in their own bedrooms, and in their own homes.... is no business of mine....OR YOURS!

Religious people are absolutely OK so long as they don't try and pass laws that require we believe what they have to say. It's the same with militant atheism, so long as they don't get to mandate that people aren't allowed to believe the way they wish I could care less.

Basically I want people to stay the hell out of other peoples lives and business.

 

[westwall]

Really? Why? People are born, grow old and die every single day. Some live long lives thanks to their genetics, some live short lives. Some die from doing stupid dangerous things, some don't. Good people die of dread diseases every minute of every day, while vile, evil, people live out their scumbag existences preying on the good people around them.

If you see logic amongst that, then I need to know what your smokin'.

There is nothing "illogical" about it. Human beings are primates who live a certain amount of time and then die. Countless and impossible to consider variables exist with the question of individual circumstances, but suffice it to say, life and nature aren't fair. For me to attempt to apply some "Godly" explanation as to why the universe isn't to your perceptions of reality perfection, is beyond my ability.

I think we all understand that humans are physical animals, primates, mammals, part of the animal kingdom. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that humans are uniquely different animals from all the rest. We can have all kinds of debate over this 'sum'n-sum'n' but clearly it does exist. I have to think a large part of that is found in man's ability to comprehend and imagine the metaphysical, existence beyond the physical. Even if you are an astute Darwinist, you have to wonder how humans came across that unique ability to achieve as humans have. None of our "closest relatives" seem to have had it... where did the trait come from, if it evolved?

I guess it's easy when you adopt the Doctrine of Nothingness?

I accept no Doctrines. Doctrines limit thought and the quest for knowledge. They also stifle debate by their very nature. I just find the claim that life must have a meaning to be "logical", without basis.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why do you assume it has to mean anything?

Because he says so.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Why do you assume it has to mean anything?

Because everything points in that direction from a logic perspective in my reality. I see "cause and effect" in the universe around me and I understand that in reality, there is a reason for everything. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Therefore, purpose must relate to cause. If this reality exists, if life exists, if our minds, imaginations, etc., all exist... there must be a reason.

We didn't wake up this morning floating out into space, talking about how "gravity" decided to take the day off... just wasn't feeling the cosmic energy today or something... so here we are, stuck in a day without gravity! Nope... it worked today the same as it has worked since the beginning of the universe. Why do we assume it has to? Well... maybe because if it didn't, we'd really be up shit creek? It actually HAS to exist for "exist" to have relevant meaning.

Physics has been one of our most powerful tools. It has given us broad understanding of the mechanics of our physical universe, but it is currently on the brink of completely uncharted territory. If what some theorize is true, "reality" could exist in millions or billions of forms. One theoretical physicist drew laughter from the line, "it's possible a universe could exist where Elvis is still alive!" But seriously, we don't know what secrets lie in the cosmos.

Again... back on point... I can't wrap my mind around the idea that this is all for nothing and has no real reason or purpose because that doesn't make sense to me.

Really? Why? People are born, grow old and die every single day. Some live long lives thanks to their genetics, some live short lives. Some die from doing stupid dangerous things, some don't. Good people die of dread diseases every minute of every day, while vile, evil, people live out their scumbag existences preying on the good people around them.

If you see logic amongst that, then I need to know what your smokin'.

You are thinking too small.

 

[westwall]

Because everything points in that direction from a logic perspective in my reality. I see "cause and effect" in the universe around me and I understand that in reality, there is a reason for everything. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Therefore, purpose must relate to cause. If this reality exists, if life exists, if our minds, imaginations, etc., all exist... there must be a reason.

We didn't wake up this morning floating out into space, talking about how "gravity" decided to take the day off... just wasn't feeling the cosmic energy today or something... so here we are, stuck in a day without gravity! Nope... it worked today the same as it has worked since the beginning of the universe. Why do we assume it has to? Well... maybe because if it didn't, we'd really be up shit creek? It actually HAS to exist for "exist" to have relevant meaning.

Physics has been one of our most powerful tools. It has given us broad understanding of the mechanics of our physical universe, but it is currently on the brink of completely uncharted territory. If what some theorize is true, "reality" could exist in millions or billions of forms. One theoretical physicist drew laughter from the line, "it's possible a universe could exist where Elvis is still alive!" But seriously, we don't know what secrets lie in the cosmos.

Again... back on point... I can't wrap my mind around the idea that this is all for nothing and has no real reason or purpose because that doesn't make sense to me.

Really? Why? People are born, grow old and die every single day. Some live long lives thanks to their genetics, some live short lives. Some die from doing stupid dangerous things, some don't. Good people die of dread diseases every minute of every day, while vile, evil, people live out their scumbag existences preying on the good people around them.

If you see logic amongst that, then I need to know what your smokin'.

You are thinking too small.

Don't present me with a two hour propaganda piece and expect me to watch it. I have better things to do with my time. If YOU have an argument, make it.

 

[sameech]

Boss:

Nobody knows what it "all means" and never will. My best advice is to try to do as best as you can, subscribing to whatever morals or ethics that allow you to thrive as an individual and as a part of whatever group you may be affiliated with, be that just family, or friends, or some wider communities. Along the way, try to avoid the malice/hatred/jealousy we see every day, here and in the real world, as they add no true value to your existence. Take whatever you want to be "truth", let that be your truth, and just run with it.

Best regards,

--Sam

 

[Boss]

Don't present me with a two hour propaganda piece and expect me to watch it. I have better things to do with my time. If YOU have an argument, make it.

I made an argument and you made up a reason to reject it. I can see by this posting, you do have a sense of time and it holds some semblance of value to you. But your perception of time and the realizations happening within it's space, are finite. Reality as we comprehend it, only exists as a component of our finite universe. Time is only the measure by which our universe is expanding.

Immortality... When we speak this word, it seems to draw ire from the Anti-God crowd, because this defies the principles of physics and the material reality we exist in. But simply put, it describes the higher cosmos, above the level of our universe and plane of reality, where time means nothing. Once you comprehend the universe is expanding, creating time, reality and logic, material elements... subatomic elements... but that it's finite and will one day end, then you have to ponder what is beyond this universe?

 

[westwall]

Don't present me with a two hour propaganda piece and expect me to watch it. I have better things to do with my time. If YOU have an argument, make it.

I made an argument and you made up a reason to reject it. I can see by this posting, you do have a sense of time and it holds some semblance of value to you. But your perception of time and the realizations happening within it's space, are finite. Reality as we comprehend it, only exists as a component of our finite universe. Time is only the measure by which our universe is expanding.

Immortality... When we speak this word, it seems to draw ire from the Anti-God crowd, because this defies the principles of physics and the material reality we exist in. But simply put, it describes the higher cosmos, above the level of our universe and plane of reality, where time means nothing. Once you comprehend the universe is expanding, creating time, reality and logic, material elements... subatomic elements... but that it's finite and will one day end, then you have to ponder what is beyond this universe?

Is there anything beyond this universe? I don't know. I would like to think there is. I would love to travel to the other galaxies when I die to see what they are like. Will I get the chance to do that? Who knows.

But that isn't what your OP is about. You OP is about meaning. My contention is there need not be a meaning for anything. Life is just life. Life it the best you can, and enjoy it the best you can.

When people attempt to place meaning on life.....that's when idealogues and other undesirables warp people to do THEIR bidding...usually at the cost of the one life we know we get.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Really? Why? People are born, grow old and die every single day. Some live long lives thanks to their genetics, some live short lives. Some die from doing stupid dangerous things, some don't. Good people die of dread diseases every minute of every day, while vile, evil, people live out their scumbag existences preying on the good people around them.

If you see logic amongst that, then I need to know what your smokin'.

You are thinking too small.

Don't present me with a two hour propaganda piece and expect me to watch it. I have better things to do with my time. If YOU have an argument, make it.

That is why you think too small,you don't have time to consider reality.

 

[westwall]

You are thinking too small.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtBz1roiQR8

Don't present me with a two hour propaganda piece and expect me to watch it. I have better things to do with my time. If YOU have an argument, make it.

That is why you think too small,you don't have time to consider reality.

No, I don't choose to watch propaganda. If you have a point make it. Don't rely on others.

 

[Hollie]

"There is something more powerful than us in play here", .......because I say so.

There is nothing whatsoever about a question which indicates anything remotely close to "because I say so." In fact, if there could be a thing more opposite of such a statement, I don't know what it might be. Questions are generally asked by people in search of answers. That isn't professing a "because I say so" argument at all.

Disengage yourself from 'imminent attack mode' for a moment or two, and ponder the OP question. Then, try to formulate some coherent answer to explain your views of reality.

Unless you just WANT to keep looking like a troll...

She wants it to be "because you say so" because then she has excused herself from thinking and participating in the search for truth.

Not at all. Your search for truth has ended at your religious belief.

Someone tells me “Yeah – the gods have spoken to me” is all I need to “believe”? That sounds like a simple Santa Clause (purposeful misspelling) model that “less than critically thinking” people who are not particularly discriminating, can embrace without their sense of proportions getting violated.

Accepting the "gods did it", model means having to assume a lot more than just an illogical frame of reference. It means having to postulate natural reality is also evidence of the supernatural (thereby hopelessly blurring what is meant by "natural" and "supernatural"), and it also means having to assume a written text (in your case the bibles, but it could be the Koran, or Bhagavad gita, etc) is somehow accurate in its perception of the metaphysical. This assumption is based purely on the texts self-proclaiming themselves this authority, and upon nothing else. Additionally, this assumption is not made on the part of the believer with any conscience effort. It's a function of family values. You are further burdened by appealing to a worldview where reality isn't cohesive-- a reality in which worlds are created by thoughts, seas part, dead men rise, men "ascend to heaven" and so on.

So, honestly, don't feel a need to lecture anyone on seeking truth.

 

[Hollie]

An unhealthy fascination with supernatural realms is cause for concern.

Should I take this to mean there are healthy degrees of fascination with supernatural realms that are of no concern?

I wouldn't describe your behavior as representative of being healthy.

I do find you entertaining in that you have a habit of tripping over your own self-refuting arguments and then dust yourself off and proceed on as if nothing has happened.

Your finding "logic" in your claims to supernatural realms is a hoot. What precisely is “logical” about the supernatural? There is really no logical way of reaching the conclusion that “an eternal and uncaused supernatural entity was responsible for the creation of all.” That conclusion itself is a direct contradiction to the position that everything has a cause.

If there was one such uncaused thing, why not many?

If there can be an unlimited thing after all, why does that unlimited thing have to be gods, rather than simply the universe itself?

Now would be a good time to point out another total failure in your arguments. Let’s pretend just for the sake of argument that the asserter of an uncaused supernatural entity had not directly contradicted himself. Let’s pretend that we somehow did reach the conclusion that at the end of this eternal chain of causation, there was an “unlimited cause” that started the whole thing.

What does this argument tell us about the nature and character of that “unlimited cause?”

Not a doggone thing. It could be Allah, Yahweh, Krishna, Zeus, Quetzalcoatl, or some as yet undiscovered and unnamed giant cosmic muffin. Even were this argument correct (which it is not) it offers no evidence for the existence of your gods. Your gods are but one particular version of “gods” unique to one particular religious group. And there is no basis for connecting your sectarian deity with any of the arguments we have been offered to this point.

 

[RandomVariable]

An unhealthy fascination with supernatural realms is cause for concern.

Should I take this to mean there are healthy degrees of fascination with supernatural realms that are of no concern?

I wouldn't describe your behavior as representative of being healthy.

I do find you entertaining in that you have a habit of tripping over your own self-refuting arguments and then dust yourself off and proceed on as if nothing has happened.

Your finding "logic" in your claims to supernatural realms is a hoot. What precisely is “logical” about the supernatural? There is really no logical way of reaching the conclusion that “an eternal and uncaused supernatural entity was responsible for the creation of all.” That conclusion itself is a direct contradiction to the position that everything has a cause.

If there was one such uncaused thing, why not many?

If there can be an unlimited thing after all, why does that unlimited thing have to be gods, rather than simply the universe itself?

Now would be a good time to point out another total failure in your arguments. Let’s pretend just for the sake of argument that the asserter of an uncaused supernatural entity had not directly contradicted himself. Let’s pretend that we somehow did reach the conclusion that at the end of this eternal chain of causation, there was an “unlimited cause” that started the whole thing.

What does this argument tell us about the nature and character of that “unlimited cause?”

Not a doggone thing. It could be Allah, Yahweh, Krishna, Zeus, Quetzalcoatl, or some as yet undiscovered and unnamed giant cosmic muffin. Even were this argument correct (which it is not) it offers no evidence for the existence of your gods. Your gods are but one particular version of “gods” unique to one particular religious group. And there is no basis for connecting your sectarian deity with any of the arguments we have been offered to this point.

You answered his question with a statement that his questioning should not be and then asked 20 question, or so, to his question, and in the process said not a thing. Have I summed that up about right?

 

[Hollie]

Should I take this to mean there are healthy degrees of fascination with supernatural realms that are of no concern?

I wouldn't describe your behavior as representative of being healthy.

I do find you entertaining in that you have a habit of tripping over your own self-refuting arguments and then dust yourself off and proceed on as if nothing has happened.

Your finding "logic" in your claims to supernatural realms is a hoot. What precisely is “logical” about the supernatural? There is really no logical way of reaching the conclusion that “an eternal and uncaused supernatural entity was responsible for the creation of all.” That conclusion itself is a direct contradiction to the position that everything has a cause.

If there was one such uncaused thing, why not many?

If there can be an unlimited thing after all, why does that unlimited thing have to be gods, rather than simply the universe itself?

Now would be a good time to point out another total failure in your arguments. Let’s pretend just for the sake of argument that the asserter of an uncaused supernatural entity had not directly contradicted himself. Let’s pretend that we somehow did reach the conclusion that at the end of this eternal chain of causation, there was an “unlimited cause” that started the whole thing.

What does this argument tell us about the nature and character of that “unlimited cause?”

Not a doggone thing. It could be Allah, Yahweh, Krishna, Zeus, Quetzalcoatl, or some as yet undiscovered and unnamed giant cosmic muffin. Even were this argument correct (which it is not) it offers no evidence for the existence of your gods. Your gods are but one particular version of “gods” unique to one particular religious group. And there is no basis for connecting your sectarian deity with any of the arguments we have been offered to this point.

You answered his question with a statement that his questioning should not be and then asked 20 question, or so, to his question, and in the process said not a thing. Have I summed that up about right?

Can't tell. I couldn't make heads nor tales of your comment.

 

[RandomVariable]

I wouldn't describe your behavior as representative of being healthy.

I do find you entertaining in that you have a habit of tripping over your own self-refuting arguments and then dust yourself off and proceed on as if nothing has happened.

Your finding "logic" in your claims to supernatural realms is a hoot. What precisely is “logical” about the supernatural? There is really no logical way of reaching the conclusion that “an eternal and uncaused supernatural entity was responsible for the creation of all.” That conclusion itself is a direct contradiction to the position that everything has a cause.

If there was one such uncaused thing, why not many?

If there can be an unlimited thing after all, why does that unlimited thing have to be gods, rather than simply the universe itself?

Now would be a good time to point out another total failure in your arguments. Let’s pretend just for the sake of argument that the asserter of an uncaused supernatural entity had not directly contradicted himself. Let’s pretend that we somehow did reach the conclusion that at the end of this eternal chain of causation, there was an “unlimited cause” that started the whole thing.

What does this argument tell us about the nature and character of that “unlimited cause?”

Not a doggone thing. It could be Allah, Yahweh, Krishna, Zeus, Quetzalcoatl, or some as yet undiscovered and unnamed giant cosmic muffin. Even were this argument correct (which it is not) it offers no evidence for the existence of your gods. Your gods are but one particular version of “gods” unique to one particular religious group. And there is no basis for connecting your sectarian deity with any of the arguments we have been offered to this point.

You answered his question with a statement that his questioning should not be and then asked 20 question, or so, to his question, and in the process said not a thing. Have I summed that up about right?

Can't tell. I couldn't make heads nor tales of your comment.

Allow me to rephrase then. Why did you write such a long reply but not say anything?

 

[Hollie]

You answered his question with a statement that his questioning should not be and then asked 20 question, or so, to his question, and in the process said not a thing. Have I summed that up about right?

Can't tell. I couldn't make heads nor tales of your comment.

Allow me to rephrase then. Why did you write such a long reply but not say anything?

I did say something. If you want to critique, that's fine, but you didn't. Why did you offer a comment on my post when you had nothing to say?

 

[RandomVariable]

Can't tell. I couldn't make heads nor tales of your comment.

Allow me to rephrase then. Why did you write such a long reply but not say anything?

I did say something. If you want to critique, that's fine, but you didn't. Why did you offer a comment on my post when you had nothing to say?

Because you insulted Boss.

 

[Hollie]

Allow me to rephrase then. Why did you write such a long reply but not say anything?

I did say something. If you want to critique, that's fine, but you didn't. Why did you offer a comment on my post when you had nothing to say?

Because you insulted Boss.

He'll have to learn to live with that.

 

[RandomVariable]

I did say something. If you want to critique, that's fine, but you didn't. Why did you offer a comment on my post when you had nothing to say?

Because you insulted Boss.

He'll have to learn to live with that.

I did not find that funny. (OK, maybe just a little. )

 

[RandomVariable]

I am not familiar with Spinoza's work. It sounds like he has three different philosophies, some religion/spirituality, some metaphysics/physics and some ethics. In all that jumble I can see why you are asking what it all means. A philosophy is a the theory of how one perceives reality. Personally I go with a modified version multiple universe theory. I also believe we are extremely limited in our ability to perceive reality with our narrow band five senses. None of this addresses the question of what does it all mean however.

You have lots and lots of odds and ends in your post so if this leaves out some of it I would be happy to elaborate. Atheists can have no meaning in the world. Everything is simply cause and effect, one billiard ball to another with a little uncertainty principle thrown in. Agnostics can believe there is a meaning to life but without a specific, living God there is no way to search for that meaning. If one has religion, and religion can be just one person but it must be for a living God, then one can search for the meaning of it all. Only through gaining understanding from God can one know meaning. One can seek wisdom from the wrong source, such as from an idol, and one will never gain understanding. One must actually find the one true God. I believe it would be best to seek God through a established religion. I developed my understanding of God through direct intervention. I understand this is not common. Currently I am examining Christianity, due in large part to the gentle urgings of my friend, GISMYS. There are lots of online sermons so it is much easier to explore a religion than in the “old days.” Don't let stereotypes and others prevent you from trying out religious teachings. To find a living God and seek them every day is the only way to understanding the meaning of it all. Trying to understand the meaning of it all might be a little grandiose. Simply finding a purpose of one's own life is more than most people find in a lifetime.

Even if every person in America were Christians, for example, this country would still need excellent schools that taught reading, science, music, and ethics. The country would need courts that were fair and just and independent of religion. A political system that was free of corruption and, even if every citizen was of one religion, separation of church and state is the only way to make laws. If not then Congressmen, for example, would be claiming they know what God wants and oppose others on those grounds alone. If one does get guidance from God then one can argue their point with conviction with invoking the name of God, unless they are discussing God that is.