You seriously want to fuck him up only because he said that?
You say that as if you’ve never had a pretty and naked lady in your bed.
The purpose of my life is to help Khaos in his purpose of making sersoft’s life better.
We have to consider the question itself (in a rare bit of seriousness from me):
“What is the meaning of life?”
First, we assume that everything has a “meaning” or a “reason” for its existence. And we wouldn’t be wrong because many things in our life have meanings or reasons. Take the Pyramids in Egypt. Many people have tried to deduce ulterior motives for the pyramids beyond tombs for pharaohs. Even things where we know the meaning of something, such as what the Empire State Building is. It’s generally an office building.
We have ascribed “meaning” to this bunch of cement, steel, windows, and other material. And we assume that everything must have a “meaning”. After all, what is a computer if not a bunch of metal, silicon, and other material? It’s what we make out of it.
Same, in my opinion, with life. We typically ascribe meaning to life, but sometimes there really isn’t a reason beyond what we ascribe to it. Because, well, “meaning” is a probably nothing more than a human concept (at least, as we know it).
We are nothing more than meat, bones, blood, synapses, and such. But we ascribe meaning to our existence. And that varies from person to person.
What is the “meaning of life”? Whatever you might answer, you’re correct.
This.
It’s the same thing with everything we humans “created”. For instance, a hat wouldn’t be a hat if we didn’t decide that it is a hat. It would just be a structure of particles.
The similar constitution i.e. function of “life” and “dog” in the questions makes this objection arise. Thus the question beforehand should be: What is the meaning of “meaning”? (Putnam wrote an article about it, I didnt read though)
And this in interesting thing to know for those who do not speak German: “meaning” has 2 translations:
- “Bedeutung” which points to the question of the essence of a word or concept. Somebody asking “Was bedeutet das?” is asking for an explanation for something he/she cannot understand but has obviously evidence for. E.g. you see a hummock of books lying around. One would say: What is the meaning of this? Did they fell from a car? Is it art? Are they going to be burnt?
The thing is: there IS something one is asking after. The same like the existence of concepts. The labels “life”, “dogs” exist. We can and should ask for the meaning of them. “What is the meaning of ‘life’?” would be translated into “Describe the extensions of the label ‘life’.” - “Sinn”. As “Describe the extensions of the label ‘life’.” was not the intended question of this thread I guess (although it always helps to just make up spheres of labels to find one owns associations), I can say the German translation of the question would be “Was ist der Sinn des Lebens?”.
“Sinn” rather points to “purpose”, to something that might not be obvious at the first look. The translation of “purpose” is “Zweck” which in German is again used for rather tangible things. The “Zweck” of traffic lights is obvious, but when you start asking for the “Sinn” of it, it can become tricky.
“Sinn” also relates to a mind-specific aspect as well, and that is the true source to the meaning (Bedeutung) of “Sinn”, I think (except for “Sinn” used to mean “sense”). The label “Sinn” describes the very essence of what it means to understand. If something makes Sinn for you, you are in that very instant when you were able to connect two (or more) unconnected elements, giving your mind the satisfying sense of enlightment (more or less). (the art is, to stay being able to challenge your own insights all the time no matter how intense the moment of understanding, of grasping the Sinn was.
When you reduce “meaning” to items that mankind created, you forget that the concept of “table” etc. existed before a table was created. Or would you say the moment one of our ancestors accidentally used a stub as a table, he invented it?
And what about abstract concepts like conviction, justice etc? Do they have meaning because we created it for a purpose and thus has it a defined reason for existing? And if you say so, with “life” its the same thing, although very,very connected to material things, as you explained. Or did those things just happen along with humans?
Actually I would agree in that sense as I understand “purpose” as “Zweck” which would mean that the purpose of life is to live.
Still this does not answer the question for the meaning (Sinn) of life.
The purpose is to reproduce (Zweck) I’d agree. But we should make a difference between we as individuals and us as the human race.
So though it might be an advantage if exceptional specimen (like me^_^) would reproduce more than others, but on the other hand the genetic code is there. It is finite, and it is not even huge. So with time passing flawed code is gonna be sorted out. And if you see it this way, there might have been an intention in the first place (Eden).
Agreed. But this is not your purpose. It’s more about the meaning of Life. You guys should make up a new word for “Sinn”! I think this will be enhancing.
And when you think about being happy as the Sinn of life, you KNOW that what makes all of us happy is Freedom.
Kool! Language Philosopher!
This is it! You are looking for the essential distinction between meaning(Bedeutung)/purpose(Zweck) AND meaning(Sinn)/reason(Grund).
Funny (and sad) how degeneration of our languages is clipping our thinking. We should always keep in mind: Each concept which is lost to us to access, will be so hard to be regained!
Wat
neither got it.
“Meaning” (both definitions), “purpose”, and “reason” are, as far as we know, human concepts. Or, at least, concepts that living creatures ascribe to things. Heck, look at these words on your computer screen. What are they? Just a pattern of squiggles. Some straight lines, some loops, some arches. We ascribe meaning to each individual squiggle and to certain patterns of squiggles to become a way to communicate without speech. Place the correct squiggles in the wrong sequence and you lose the capacity to communicate effectively: “Sflauf prqfh apffe grou”. Because we ascribe meaning to the patterns of squiggles.
We have to. As living creatures.
But that sometimes this ascribing meaning can cause a miscommunication. Such as worshiping a salt stain on a wall for an overpass:
Question then: Which concept is not?
As to the distinction I was referring to: Is there a difference between “precision” and “truth”?
[align=center]The purpose of my life is to help make SURPLUS_NiNjA’s life better so that he can help make
Khaos’ life better so that Khaos can make sersoft’s life better[/align].
[align=center]
[/align]
I don’t follow.
To me, everything just “is”. We are trying to figure out our world and the reality in which we find ourselves. I hazard to use the word “truth” in this context because, well, so many things are labeled “truth” that just have no evidence to back them up. Is it the “truth” that my computer goes out and kills humans when I’m not around it simply because I believe it does? And “precision” (unless you’re using a different definition than I think you are) is simply a way of being as accurate as possible.
there are mathematical rules that affect everything, combinations of matter of different kinds triggers different reactions, time acts as a filter, eventually you start to see patterns, a chain of successful experiments out of a trillion unsuccessful ones, no conceivable purpose because the scientist, the science and the experiment are all generated by the raw mathematical precision of total chaos
the only reason the universe is so tangible to us is because it makes up the very fabric of what we are
the meaning of life is to know the truth before it hits you in the face
truth doesn’t exist, really
any sufficiently complete mathematical system is incomplete, which means there is no real truth, only levels of certainty
Fuck Descartes, if you’re refering to him.
Ok, sorry for bringing this into the picky word-nazi hehe. But in a way it is essential to find Sinn in something, rather than just meaning.
And this leads to the mind-body problem in philosophy. Because it affects the status our words, concepts, thoughts have. And if we just say, the meaing of life is to be happy by being free, we still are thrown back at the problem what status have concepts like “freedom”, “justice” and so on.
Btw, Nelson Goodman worked out that actually the concept of truth is not sustainable in the sense it exist now and tends to seek an alteration to what I called “Richtigkeit” (https://www.dict.cc/?s=richtigkeit).
“Sinn” is not an English word so I don’t know what it really means.
Life just is.
You are correct.
It doesn’t exist but that means it has just hit me in the face and I should have known beforehand, so my point still stands.
referring to gödel’s proof, actually