Scientifically life has no meaning. This means that there is no real purpose or goal that life must achieve. (On a side note, we can "make up" goals like achieving perfect happiness, but that is just a goal that is exclusive to species like us.) Anyway, I just wanted to disprove the common thought in evolutionary scientology of "Nature's goal is to reproduce." As a matter of fact there is no more of a "Nature's goal to reproduce" than there is a "Rock's goal to turn into sand." Scientists have come to this misconception the wrong way. Really what happens is the life that cannot reproduce just doesn't exist throughout time so the only life that gets recognized is the life that can. There is no "Goal of Existence" this is just Simple Logic.
I know you probably all *know* this already, I have known this for years, but I thinking this new way will make life even Clearer.
| EanofAthenasPrime wrote: |
| As a matter of fact there is no more of a "Nature's goal to reproduce" than there is a "Rock's goal to turn into sand." . |
I very much agree. If there was no life its not like anyone would know any different right. After all there has been more suffering than happiness in history would it be such a bad thing if there was no life? Im no psychologist but to my understanding all humans have a 'thantos' which is a death drive that encourages us to engage in life threatening behaviour so maybe humans subconsciously know that they should not exist. This is also apparent in nature, im no physicist however i believe there is a state of matter called a Bose-Einstein Condensate which occur in temperatures close to absolute zero (the lowest temperature achievable at which matter neither emits or absorbs energy, and it could be said to be 'dead'). In this state the matter creeps up the sides of a container in an effort to apparently rid itself of its last reserves of energy, effectively killing itself. Despite all this I love being alive and as I am meaningless it just makes me feel priveledged to be alive.Hm, the argument for 'Here's why' was not there at all. Ok, so you think so... Is it so hard to miss why life has a meaning??? The meaning of life is not to reproduce, I agree. But life is not meaningless - can anyone figure out the reason?
| spinout wrote: |
| The meaning of life is not to reproduce, I agree. But life is not meaningless - can anyone figure out the reason? |
Maybe the meaning of life is for the human race to accquire enough knowledge to answer that questionThe only meaning life has is whatever we personally say it has. I am saying that the commonly thought "goal" of natural selection is to reproduce is completely incorrect. Natural selection is completely random and reproduction is an ability that survived only because of its very function, the only other ability that shares the same function is invincibility, and if it had existed scientists would have surely said that the meaning of life is to obtain invincibility...
breebree-That "condensate" can be explained by the fact that heat always travels to cold, analogous to high pressure filling the low pressure. And that desire to be alive is because your ancestors had that desire, and like you said, the ones that didn't wouldn't have lived to pass it on...
| EanofAthenasPrime wrote: |
| Natural selection is completely random and reproduction is an ability that survived only because of its very function |
On the contrary, natural selection is anything but random. It is based on the theory that those with traits best adapted to survive in their habitat survive, reproduce and thus the next generation has evolved. If natural selection were random life would not exist as we know it today. As for reproduction being an ability which only survived because of its function, which I must say is a very good way of putting it I must add, greatly downplays its part in history. Every living thing reproduces, from whales to viruses. Were it not for reproduction, there would be no life beyond the first generation, or even the first being.
| EanofAthenasPrime wrote: |
| That "condensate" can be explained by the fact that heat always travels to cold, analogous to high pressure filling the low pressure. |
The reason a Bose-Einstein condensate climbs the walls of a container is that it has no friction at all, meaning that gravity no longer takes effect means that increased adhesion between the container and the condensate is possible. Also, 'the fact that heat always travels to cold' (convection) would have no effect in a Bose-Einstein condensate as they are at the coldest temperature ever achieved, only slightly above 0kelvinEven though I do not know much about that "condensate" frictionlessness is completely seperate from gravity...
Natural selection is fundamentally random, it is the process in which (due to random mutation) happened to be best like survive in an arbitrary environment do survive...
| EanofAthenasPrime wrote: |
| Even though I do not know much about that "condensate" frictionlessness is completely seperate from gravity... |
Quite the opposite, it is because it has no friction that it is able to climb the walls of the container and is adhered to it, under ordinary circumstances this is not the case as gravity pulls down on the material but the condensate is essentially 'stuck' to the container.
| EanofAthenasPrime wrote: |
| Natural selection is fundamentally random, it is the process in which (due to random mutation) happened to be best like survive in an arbitrary environment do survive... |
Yeah in this context I suppose natural selection is random if you mean the way in which the animals themselves adapt ahead of their own species however I would'nt say it was fundamentally random as the animals best suited to their environment carry on their genes.Mutations occur randomly, but selection is not a stochastic process. There are predictable, directional outcomes of selective effects. A salt crystal is formed by stochastic (ie, random) interactions with the surrounding salt-containing medium, but the actual feature of the crystal itself is not that of a random structure. Likewise with evolution.
| EanofAthenasPrime wrote: |
Scientifically life has no meaning. This means that there is no real purpose or goal that life must achieve. (On a side note, we can "make up" goals like achieving perfect happiness, but that is just a goal that is exclusive to species like us.) Anyway, I just wanted to disprove the common thought in evolutionary scientology of "Nature's goal is to reproduce." As a matter of fact there is no more of a "Nature's goal to reproduce" than there is a "Rock's goal to turn into sand." Scientists have come to this misconception the wrong way. Really what happens is the life that cannot reproduce just doesn't exist throughout time so the only life that gets recognized is the life that can. There is no "Goal of Existence" this is just Simple Logic.
I know you probably all *know* this already, I have known this for years, but I thinking this new way will make life even Clearer. |
You think too much. Enjoy life.
We are made to make up our own goals to make ourselves happy. Or else we'll be suffering and not having fun.Yes well....I think this topic doesn't have a solid meaning either...lol
True but what else do we have?
So have you ever played a game like 'black n white'? Not that I fancy that game but I think it has a key to the meaning of life!
Then afterward came a game called 'the movies' from the same corp... Also that one has the key to the meaning. This is not a comercial, I don't like these games BUT indeed I think those games hold the key to the meaning of life.
| EanofAthenasPrime wrote: |
Scientifically life has no meaning. This means that there is no real purpose or goal that life must achieve. (On a side note, we can "make up" goals like achieving perfect happiness, but that is just a goal that is exclusive to species like us.) Anyway, I just wanted to disprove the common thought in evolutionary scientology of "Nature's goal is to reproduce." As a matter of fact there is no more of a "Nature's goal to reproduce" than there is a "Rock's goal to turn into sand." Scientists have come to this misconception the wrong way. Really what happens is the life that cannot reproduce just doesn't exist throughout time so the only life that gets recognized is the life that can. There is no "Goal of Existence" this is just Simple Logic.
I know you probably all *know* this already, I have known this for years, but I thinking this new way will make life even Clearer. |
Scientifically, life does have a meaning. Life is something living thing has, and is only entitled to living things. The meaning of life is to live. The real purpose or goal that life must achieve, is to survive. Ever since our most ancient ancestors, that has been our one true goal of life. To survive, simple enough as said, but hard to achieve.
Nature's goal is to reproduce is not entirely wrong, for in order to survive ( our goal in life ) is to produce more of us, so we won't be extinct. There is no "Rock's goal to turn into sand" simply because a rock is not a living thing and it simply does not have life, so it does not need to survive, nor does it have a need to reproduce.
Just my 2 cents worth. One life, live it. Why think about the meaning when it was as simple as just living? If you don't wish to live, then just die, no one will blame you, it's your life, not ours. 
| JinTenshi wrote: |
| EanofAthenasPrime wrote: | Scientifically life has no meaning. This means that there is no real purpose or goal that life must achieve. (On a side note, we can "make up" goals like achieving perfect happiness, but that is just a goal that is exclusive to species like us.) Anyway, I just wanted to disprove the common thought in evolutionary scientology of "Nature's goal is to reproduce." As a matter of fact there is no more of a "Nature's goal to reproduce" than there is a "Rock's goal to turn into sand." Scientists have come to this misconception the wrong way. Really what happens is the life that cannot reproduce just doesn't exist throughout time so the only life that gets recognized is the life that can. There is no "Goal of Existence" this is just Simple Logic.
I know you probably all *know* this already, I have known this for years, but I thinking this new way will make life even Clearer. |
Scientifically, life does have a meaning. Life is something living thing has, and is only entitled to living things. The meaning of life is to live. The real purpose or goal that life must achieve, is to survive. Ever since our most ancient ancestors, that has been our one true goal of life. To survive, simple enough as said, but hard to achieve.
Nature's goal is to reproduce is not entirely wrong, for in order to survive ( our goal in life ) is to produce more of us, so we won't be extinct. There is no "Rock's goal to turn into sand" simply because a rock is not a living thing and it simply does not have life, so it does not need to survive, nor does it have a need to reproduce.
Just my 2 cents worth. One life, live it. Why think about the meaning when it was as simple as just living? If you don't wish to live, then just die, no one will blame you, it's your life, not ours. |
That is exactly the attitude that I am trying to disprove! Don't you see? The "desire to live" is carried down through geneology, the species that didn't have the desire didn't live long enough to carry out there DNA...The "desire to live" is just a random occurence that exists only because of its fundamental purpose...a different trait with the same fundamental purpose would be "invincibility"...and btw I never said anything about being suicidal...Erm, I accidentally doubled posted and I don't know why I can't delete this post. Can someone delete it for me? Thanks and sorry for spam, it was an accident.
Last edited by JinTenshi on Fri Aug 17, 2007 5:45 am; edited 1 time in total
| EanofAthenasPrime wrote: |
| JinTenshi wrote: | | EanofAthenasPrime wrote: | Scientifically life has no meaning. This means that there is no real purpose or goal that life must achieve. (On a side note, we can "make up" goals like achieving perfect happiness, but that is just a goal that is exclusive to species like us.) Anyway, I just wanted to disprove the common thought in evolutionary scientology of "Nature's goal is to reproduce." As a matter of fact there is no more of a "Nature's goal to reproduce" than there is a "Rock's goal to turn into sand." Scientists have come to this misconception the wrong way. Really what happens is the life that cannot reproduce just doesn't exist throughout time so the only life that gets recognized is the life that can. There is no "Goal of Existence" this is just Simple Logic.
I know you probably all *know* this already, I have known this for years, but I thinking this new way will make life even Clearer. |
Scientifically, life does have a meaning. Life is something living thing has, and is only entitled to living things. The meaning of life is to live. The real purpose or goal that life must achieve, is to survive. Ever since our most ancient ancestors, that has been our one true goal of life. To survive, simple enough as said, but hard to achieve.
Nature's goal is to reproduce is not entirely wrong, for in order to survive ( our goal in life ) is to produce more of us, so we won't be extinct. There is no "Rock's goal to turn into sand" simply because a rock is not a living thing and it simply does not have life, so it does not need to survive, nor does it have a need to reproduce.
Just my 2 cents worth. One life, live it. Why think about the meaning when it was as simple as just living? If you don't wish to live, then just die, no one will blame you, it's your life, not ours. |
That is exactly the attitude that I am trying to disprove! Don't you see? The "desire to live" is carried down through geneology, the species that didn't have the desire didn't live long enough to carry out there DNA...The "desire to live" is just a random occurence that exists only because of its fundamental purpose...a different trait with the same fundamental purpose would be "invincibility"...and btw I never said anything about being suicidal... |
My bad about reading too much into your words, I apologise.
And sorry, can you re-evaluate your last post by using layman terms. I'm having a hard time understanding what exactly are you trying to disprove and I don't want to jump to conclusions.EAP, you should substitute the word "atheism" for "science" in your post. The two are very different! Science says nothing at all about the meaning of life.
| guissmo wrote: |
You think too much. Enjoy life.
|
I agree with guissmo...
I just live life as it is at the moment. 
| nopaniers wrote: |
| EAP, you should substitute the word "atheism" for "science" in your post. The two are very different! Science says nothing at all about the meaning of life. |
Neither does atheism...
Jenteshi-I do not believe that even with a mastery of the English language I can perfectly convey what I am trying to explain... | EanofAthenasPrime wrote: |
| True intelligence lies not in the ability to confuse people with complexity of words, rather, it lies in the ability to teach how to simplify something that has great complexity |
Try that.
You spelt my name wrong too, but nevermind.
| nopaniers wrote: |
| EAP, you should substitute the word "atheism" for "science" in your post. The two are very different! Science says nothing at all about the meaning of life. |
The meaning of life is defined by each individual. ( Though the one true meaning would be to survive ) You don't need to have a religion or a cult or whatever, to grasp the meaning of life. Though some find their meaning of lives through their religions.breebree and EAP, I believe you are talking about superfluids. They do "creep" up and over walls. As breebree said they have no viscocity at all (viscous is something like friction in liquids - honey is thick and viscous) and they actually have infinite thermal conductivity. They can exist at non-zero temperature although not a lot above absolute zero. Normal examples are 3He and 4He. BECs are often formed from confined gasses like Rb - and they do exhibit superfluid behaviour. Cooling them is one hell of a task apparently. We had one at my undergrad uni, and they also got one up and running where I did my PhD - two of the first in the world! Cool stuff, hey?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superfluid
It is going way too far to say that that's evidence of a death drive though! These are all things from your own assumptions. | nopaniers wrote: |
breebree and EAP, I believe you are talking about superfluids. They do "creep" up and over walls. As breebree said they have no viscocity at all (viscous is something like friction in liquids - honey is thick and viscous) and they actually have infinite thermal conductivity. They can exist at non-zero temperature although not a lot above absolute zero. Normal examples are 3He and 4He. BECs are often formed from confined gasses like Rb - and they do exhibit superfluid behaviour. Cooling them is one hell of a task apparently. We had one at my undergrad uni, and they also got one up and running where I did my PhD - two of the first in the world! Cool stuff, hey?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superfluid
It is going way too far to say that that's evidence of a death drive though! These are all things from your own assumptions. |
yep I definitely have to agree...saying "superfluids have a death drive" is like saying "light likes getting a rush from traveling at high velocities..."
JenTeshi-I'd like to explain it better but I am not SuperHuman yet...I am still confined to the meager boundaries of the English dialect...1. The tendency to reproduce has come about because 'living things' die. In case of non-living things they do not die and they do not have a reproduction cycle either. What you call as a living and a non-living is itself debatable. Science is YET to define what is living and what is non-living. If man should achieve immortality, then he / she will stop reproducing.
2. Everything has a life time. The virus in seconds to the sun and the stars in milleniums. Life is limited in every one of the case.
3. The meaning of this life will never be understood unless we know why the universe and all these stars and planets exist. That is a big question. We cannot perceive the size of the universe and the entire working of it. When all that happens I think we will know the meaning of our life. Until then we will continue to ask this question.
But our life just came to exist through random chance. If we didn't exist, we wouldn't know that. Thus, I believe that our lives are (relative to the universe) meaningless...only to ourselves is the meaning to make ourselves happier.
Left as is, yes, life could most likely be deemed meaningless or without purpose. However, it is not life itself that has purpose. I think you will find that life "as you know it" will have no purpose if you don't give it one. Life only has a reason if you make one for it. For instance: "I'm going to make the world a better place tomorrow." Right there you gave your life meaning and purpose. Life is what you make of it, period. Its up to you to make it mean something.
If your meaning there is no purpose for the universe. I supose that depends on your perspective. If you believe in creation, then its very possible you weren't ment to understand the universe, its purpose, or even the purpose of your own existance. If you don't believe in creation, then it should still be noted, that we still do not know everything. Maybe its true purpose for existing is right under our noses.
You are right...but as I explained multiple times there is no fundamental meaning (that is if you are an Atheist.)
So again there finding out how to harness a black hole, understanding Higgin's bosoms...those "meanings of the Universe" are all human created. Don't get me wrong though humans did not create Black Holes. To a different race, more advanced than humans, a black hole could have as much meaning to them as an apple.
I totally agree!!!!!
so just enjoy the life fully and die happily!!!!!!
We are born, we live, and we die ... that doesn't mean we shouldn't have fun and enjoy ourselves!
| breebree wrote: |
Every living thing reproduces, from whales to viruses. Were it not for reproduction, there would be no life beyond the first generation, or even the first being.
|
I would like to add that while other species reproduce, I think most everyone will agree with me when I say, humans definitely have the most efficient way to reproduce. And by efficient, I really mean the most fun. | EanofAthenasPrime wrote: |
Scientifically life has no meaning. This means that there is no real purpose or goal that life must achieve. (On a side note, we can "make up" goals like achieving perfect happiness, but that is just a goal that is exclusive to species like us.) Anyway, I just wanted to disprove the common thought in evolutionary scientology of "Nature's goal is to reproduce." As a matter of fact there is no more of a "Nature's goal to reproduce" than there is a "Rock's goal to turn into sand." Scientists have come to this misconception the wrong way. Really what happens is the life that cannot reproduce just doesn't exist throughout time so the only life that gets recognized is the life that can. There is no "Goal of Existence" this is just Simple Logic.
I know you probably all *know* this already, I have known this for years, but I thinking this new way will make life even Clearer. |
I read a long time ago that we don't have the intelligence, yet, to know if there is or isn't any meaning because we use so little of our brain's capacity...I think it was Victor Frankl who said that...
that is has meaning or not...how do you Know?...is it a feeling you have?
I wonder sometimes why anyone asks if there is meaning to life...it's an age old question, no?...we don't even know ourselves and yet we go on asking all kinds of things...things which seem to matter so little, so, if you knew what the meaning of life was would it change our nasty behavior?...we can't live in peace together, we make ourselves and those around us miserable...you know, dog eat dog world of humans...the petty human brain...jeez...
what could be the meaning of our confusion?...
I think it's a wrong question...can you ask, why is the sky up there?...hmm, I guess you can...
MThe point made in the first post of this thread is certainly true, but it's just plain depressing. The whole point of this world is to counter that idea. If everyone felt that way, then nothing would get accomplished. No one would learn anything, no one would want to be entertained, or do anything. That's the foundation of our world - the fact that we know we won't live forever and that we want to live life to the fullest by learning about the world we live in, please other people and ourselves, succeed in everything we want to do, etc.
| Kaisonic wrote: |
| The point made in the first post of this thread is certainly true, but it's just plain depressing. The whole point of this world is to counter that idea. If everyone felt that way, then nothing would get accomplished. No one would learn anything, no one would want to be entertained, or do anything. That's the foundation of our world - the fact that we know we won't live forever and that we want to live life to the fullest by learning about the world we live in, please other people and ourselves, succeed in everything we want to do, etc. |
No it does not work that way! Life has a meaning. Only thing is that we do not understand the meaning fully.
It took centuries for human beings to understand that sun is not going round the earth but it is the other way. That was because you were sitting on the earth and watching the events. When you are in it, you cannot understand what is happening around you, easily!
Man is a part of the huge cosmic magic. It is very difficult to understand what is happening because we are sitting right inside that magic and trying to perceive what is happening needs lots of understanding. It is like the crankshaft in a car trying to understand why it is going round and round. We as a part of the universe should have some role to play and we are playing that role whether we like it or not. But the person who made all this knows it! and he does not make anything in this universe without a purpose.
Every part in our body has a meaning and purpose. Everything in this world is that way. So will it be all over the universe. And man will also have a purpose and meaning! We will realise it when we really grow up to it.I really don't think anyone knows enough about life (or its parent: existence) to say it has a meaning or doesn't have a meaning. The source of life is mystery. If the source of life is the interplay of energy, matter, and time, then their source is a mystery. Just live!
My interpretation of "meaning" means a sort of "cosmic order" set down by the Universe. I believe in evolution, which is a fundamentally random process, ie. if we didn't randomly happen to be conscious beings then we wouldn't know we weren't here.
There is an enigma, however, pertaining to consciousness. How is it that when our corporeal brain's are happy, our incorporeal minds (note I do not believe in soul, I believe that consciousness radiates from our brains, we are simply "spectators of our brain), how is it that our incorporeal minds feel happy when our brains are happy?
When I finally realized my life was meaningless, that's when I really began to value it more.
| missdixy wrote: |
| When I finally realized my life was meaningless, that's when I really began to value it more. |
No missdixy, you are not correct. Life is not meaningless.
Life has a meaning and a reason. Nothing in this world or in this universe exist for no purpose. A good manufacturer of a watch does not create a component in it for no reason. He does not have space in it for such things. Every component in it has a job to do; has a role to play.
So do we! | EanofAthenasPrime wrote: |
My interpretation of "meaning" means a sort of "cosmic order" set down by the Universe. I believe in evolution, which is a fundamentally random process, ie. if we didn't randomly happen to be conscious beings then we wouldn't know we weren't here.
There is an enigma, however, pertaining to consciousness. How is it that when our corporeal brain's are happy, our incorporeal minds (note I do not believe in soul, I believe that consciousness radiates from our brains, we are simply "spectators of our brain), how is it that our incorporeal minds feel happy when our brains are happy? |
There are lots of theories on mind and body. Of course, what you are saying is the materialistic view or materialism as it is called. Mind and body both are material. Of course, there are others who say mind is a non matter and body is physical. and the science relating to non matter is of course, metaphysics. Whether you like it or not, mind will further its own thoughts and its own understanding. But most often, the physical is influenced by the mind and the vice versa is also true.
Leaving out mind and body, you might note that life itself has more wider meaning. It is not for the sake of man that we exist, most possibly. Just because we do not make out the reason or the meaning of something we cannot say that there is none. We now know the relationship between the numerous things on the earth and how they all coexist.
There is something much more wider than the earth. We do not know what it is all about. And only when we understand all that can we also understand the reason behind our life and the earth and the sun and all those millions of stars and planets.Life does have no meaning i agree.
We can make up justifications for why we live but they are independent on each person.
There is no general meaning to fit everyone.
Some may say happiness, but what about those who don't want to be happy.
There are some who don't want to be happy and just want to die.
Death is their meaning.
But while there is life there is life.
There doesn't have to be meaning to it for people to enjoy it.
But our happiness costs the world its life, costs the environment.
Some may say we don't deserve life...
| missdixy wrote: |
| When I finally realized my life was meaningless, that's when I really began to value it more. |
i agree with missdixy...you have to be able to let it all go to really love...the petty crap of the political and religious brain has kept us suffering for a long time...i feel we need to be willing to be alone, to drop tradition and all we've been taught and told to finally come to see for ourselves...
kind regards
M | moworks2 wrote: |
| missdixy wrote: | | When I finally realized my life was meaningless, that's when I really began to value it more. |
i agree with missdixy...you have to be able to let it all go to really love...the petty crap of the political and religious brain has kept us suffering for a long time...i feel we need to be willing to be alone, to drop tradition and all we've been taught and told to finally come to see for ourselves...
kind regards
M |
I am not supporting religious fanaticism or dogmas. What need to be looked at here is that we, the humans are not alone in this world. This is not the only life form that you and I can be proud of. What we need to understand is that life in this universe has a meaning that is distinctly different from what we all know about.
it took us almost a million years of existence on this planet to understand that it is not the sun that is going round the earth but the other way! it could take another two or three million years for us to understand part of the universe. Let us wait and learn!
