What is the meaning of life?

@Godless9 I only follow what I can see is real. Life is ugly, beautiful, and real. The concept of God is not the same to everyone. We are conscious beings observing the universe we are part of. Believe what you want to believe, but you cannot deny that life is amazing. The nihlistic atheists wish to make everything bland and unimportant.
 
We've already decided this, why are you guys still discussing it? I was told it was up to me, and so I said the meaning of life is to give me money. Pretty cut and dried. Get cracking nerds, I want my cash, your life is literally meaningless if you don't do so.
 
@Godless9 I only follow what I can see is real. Life is ugly, beautiful, and real. The concept of God is not the same to everyone. We are conscious beings observing the universe we are part of. Believe what you want to believe, but you cannot deny that life is amazing. The nihlistic atheists wish to make everything bland and unimportant.
What claim do you think nihilists make that is false?
 
Probably the claim that existence is without purpose, you know, the core belief behind nihilism? It honestly feels lazy to wave away such a complicated concept so easily. Honestly, (blind) nihilism is just as inherently immature as (blind) optimism, one is just seen as more "mature" because idiots confuse it for profound thinking.
 
Probably the claim that existence is without purpose, you know, the core belief behind nihilism? It honestly feels lazy to wave away such a complicated concept so easily. Honestly, (blind) nihilism is just as inherently immature as (blind) optimism, one is just seen as more "mature" because idiots confuse it for profound thinking.

What evidence do you have that there is a macro purpose set from outside us? Nihilism is logical in that it's the only position there is sound grounding for holding it at present (it being justified by the lack of proof).

Existance itself can be purposeless, and you can still set your own micro purposes. You can have your own purposes, be they hedonistic, charitable or whatever, whilst still aknowledging in the grand scheme of things it doesn't really matter either way.

I met a traveller from an antique land,
Who said—“Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.”
 
Probably the claim that existence is without purpose, you know, the core belief behind nihilism? It honestly feels lazy to wave away such a complicated concept so easily. Honestly, (blind) nihilism is just as inherently immature as (blind) optimism, one is just seen as more "mature" because idiots confuse it for profound thinking.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/purpose
Purpose: The reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists.
You deny that atheism entails there is no purpose for life. If atheism is true life couldn't have been "created" without a creator but life exists because of unintentional purpose? I don't think it even makes sense to say "purpose" when it is not intended for anything. You believe life exists in virtue of what? I don't understand your view.
 
The purpose of life is to have children, work hard and don't be a dick. It helps to enjoy yourself because if you're sad all the time you've probably already killed yourself.

Eventually our descendants might be lucky enough to do the same in space.
 
What evidence do you have that there is a macro purpose set from outside us? Nihilism is logical in that it's the only position there is sound grounding for holding it at present (it being justified by the lack of proof).
I'm not saying there is a purpose set from outside us. The way I see it the purpose of life is the purpose you make for yourself, so really I don't really disagree with your statements except the part where you say that "it doesn't really matter".
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/purpose
Purpose: The reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists.
You deny that atheism entails there is no purpose for life. If atheism is true life couldn't have been "created" without a creator but life exists because of unintentional purpose? I don't think it even makes sense to say "purpose" when it is not intended for anything. You believe life exists in virtue of what? I don't understand your view.
I don't think we were talking about atheism in particular, but under your literal definition then the purpose of life is to have plenty of offspring and assure that we as a species don't die off. So get to it.
 
To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you and to hear the lamentations of the women.

Or it could be an ongoing personal experiment see how much a person can change over time and somehow maintain some unshakable core aspects of your personality, even with the anonymity one has online to shitpost to their heart's desire.
 
Last edited:
God created the most beautiful, pure, perfect servile creation. The angels. They bored him too death. So he created man, who, in his base imperfection forced a evolution (corruption) in his perfect creation, the angels. God was amused. You are less than a spec of sand, if not less. If you cure cancer or die in your bedroom with dried up toilet paper all over, both amuse God and is his will.
 
Last edited:
Below is my argument
  1. You do not know the purpose of life/the universe/whatever larger system you are a part of
  2. Nothing can hold any value from an ultimate frame of reference if not in relation to an ultimate purpose of the system you are in, for example a pawn in a chess game should only be valued in relation to which king it will help checkmate.
  3. Purpose from an ultimate frame of reference is currently far beyond our grasp of understanding, even when it comes to what direction we should work in.
  4. Our purpose as conscious beings then becomes finding out what the ultimate purpose is

I regard the 4 statements above as absolute truth that should be agreable by all humans, and my conclusion from these truths is that humanities goal and therefore my goal in life (I don't consider myself special) is furthering the stability and extent of intelligence. This also requires the motivation that there is a hierarchy of intelligence between say a rock and a human and maybe a human could comprehend the ultimate purpose but a rock definately could not. What I mean by "stability of intelligence" comes close to the statement "stability of society", maintaining the capabilities we do have.


The ethical implications of this I think go as following:


  1. define utilitarianism as "an ethical theory which states that the best action is the one that maximizes utility"
  2. define utility as "furthering the stability and extent of intelligence"
  3. Right and wrong and good and bad can only be defined from an ultimate frame of reference in relation to our goal, so our utilitarianism is both right and good and "maximizes" means that it's also the best ethical code by definition.

"what if there is no ultimate purpose?", then nothing holds value and it doesn't matter that we increased our intellectual capabilities or if we didn't. If you are wrong you've hindered the purpose if you are right you gain nothing.
There is not a lot of room for disagreement here unless you ascribe to meme philosophies or are very dumb and believe in things like organized religion.
 
Without an idea of the meaning of life how can you know utility is good? The idea that humans should use their lives to fulfill some purpose is a meaning of life in and of itself.
There is not a lot of room for disagreement here unless you ascribe to meme philosophies
You are holding up a value judgment as absolute truth with no evidence
 
Without an idea of the meaning of life how can you know utility is good? The idea that humans should use their lives to fulfill some purpose is a meaning of life in and of itself.

You are holding up a value judgment as absolute truth with no evidence
It's utility applied in finding out the meaning of life. We know what direction to go.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Cool kitties club
Correct me if I'm wrong but you're saying we don't currently know the meaning of life, but that we should seek to fulfill out utility to that meaning. Therefore we should maximize our ability to find/know the meaning, so that we could therefore maximize our utility to that meaning.
 
Below is my argument
  1. You do not know the purpose of life/the universe/whatever larger system you are a part of
  2. Nothing can hold any value from an ultimate frame of reference if not in relation to an ultimate purpose of the system you are in, for example a pawn in a chess game should only be valued in relation to which king it will help checkmate.
  3. Purpose from an ultimate frame of reference is currently far beyond our grasp of understanding, even when it comes to what direction we should work in.
  4. Our purpose as conscious beings then becomes finding out what the ultimate purpose is
I regard the 4 statements above as absolute truth that should be agreable by all humans, and my conclusion from these truths is that humanities goal and therefore my goal in life (I don't consider myself special) is furthering the stability and extent of intelligence.
...
There is not a lot of room for disagreement here unless you ascribe to meme philosophies or are very dumb and believe in things like organized religion.
Wrong. We already discussed this and figured out the meaning of life, then deleted the thread so the secret couldn't get out. You're way off.

But, in a more serious dismissal, your argument is fundamentally flawed. You posit "purpose" as an absolute, objective thing that exists. You also suggest some "ultimate frame of reference" which Einstein has pretty well shown doesn't even exist. All there is is the subjective and the relative. Points 3 and 4 fall apart for the same reasons.

Therefore I do not agree with your supposed "absolute truth", and thus it is apparently not agreeable by all humans.

There is only room for disagreement actually, there's no room for your meme philosophy because it's based on known bad assumptions.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Cool kitties club
It's different for everyone. It's just that simple. We try to muse dream and think it but life is just that what we make it and hope it to be.

My life is filled to you it may be good or bad empty or full and vise visra.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Cool kitties club
You're going to run into dilemmas where utilitarianism weighs the needs of the many against the needs of the few and I do not wish to live in a society where a human's right to live can be stripped away just because it's convenient.

I see no worth nor meaning in a modern world that sees people as expendable. Those are the ways of small, warring and dying populations.
 
Back