What is the point of life?

[dip]

Of course, we've all questioned what's the point of life? Why are we here?
How did the universe begin? What's beyond the universe? ect ...

Anyway, SWIM was just thinking, mabey we shouldn't have evolved this far? Considering our weak structure, we barely made it with the lucky addition of thumbs, and using our physical organ the brain to think past the physically superior animals with their low IQ.

Does anyone think that coming so far as to question our own existence seems unatural?

I think life was alot simplier when we existed as rocks.

[dip]

And then, there are scientists, with their high IQ are able to "solve" the questions by purely scientific methods, such as the Big Bang theory. SWIM wonders, have these individuals ever indulged in psychedelics? After SWIM has ... he can't think in scientific terms like that anymore.

[Nature Boy]

Many prolific scientists have used psychedelics and have no doubt thought of the big questions under that influence. Perhaps the psychedelic experience can work as a catalyst for great thinkers to question and try to solve what they thought wasn't possible before. The double-helix structure of DNA was devised under the influence of LSD.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Really? That is interesting...

[Solidly-here]

Dip wonders: "Does anyone think that coming so far as to question our own existence seems unnatural? I think life was a lot simpler when we existed as rocks."

I think questioning my existence is a cool thing.
Sure, "I think life was a lot simpler when we existed as rocks."
But I do not care to live a simple Life.
This reminds me of a saying: "Thin is IN, but FAT is where it's at."
Meaning: I can dream of how wonderful it is to be thin, but I ain't thin.
You, however, can dream about going back to being a rock (if you like).

[mouthwater]

Originally Posted by dip

Does anyone think that coming so far as to question our own existence seems unatural?

I think life was alot simplier when we existed as rocks.

Well, I think you are hinting towards "what's the meaning of it all?"

First, sure, life would be more simple as a rock, but would it be more meaningful? Would you even be aware of existence if you were a rock? It's amazing how our atoms were able to create consciousness. When we die, our atoms will disperse across the globe and universe (will we contain any sort of perpetuated consciousness after our death, we don't know). Would your atoms existing as a rock really be better than existing as an entity that is conscious?

I certainly don't think our existence is unnatural; if a deity (or deities) exist, it's necessary that we serve the purpose of being who we are (insofar as deities will what they want/should be). If there are no deities or we act as pantheists, Darwinism has led us to where we are, which should be completely natural.

So, what to do with consciousness... is there a meaning to our existence, or do we have to create one (or can we)?

[baudmax]

To DIP, re: scientists maintaining scientific method after tripping: http://www.mercola.com/2007/feb/10/d...red-it-out.htm
Francis Crick conceived of structure of DNA while on LSD. Also.. I've heard a tale of Kekule having "a dream" of a snake eating it's tail, having been the basis for his conception of the structure of a benzene ring (I seem to also recall reading somewhere that mescaline had something to do with that, but I am not so sure of it now and too lazy to search it up now).

Originally Posted by mouthwater

Well, I think you are hinting towards "what's the meaning of it all?"

First, sure, life would be more simple as a rock, but would it be more meaningful? Would you even be aware of existence if you were a rock? It's amazing how our atoms were able to create consciousness. When we die, our atoms will disperse across the globe and universe (will we contain any sort of perpetuated consciousness after our death, we don't know). Would your atoms existing as a rock really be better than existing as an entity that is conscious?

I certainly don't think our existence is unnatural; if a deity (or deities) exist, it's necessary that we serve the purpose of being who we are (insofar as deities will what they want/should be). If there are no deities or we act as pantheists, Darwinism has led us to where we are, which should be completely natural.

So, what to do with consciousness... is there a meaning to our existence, or do we have to create one (or can we)?

Well, exactly what _is_ consciousness, and is there anything to indicate that current cultural assumptions about it ( ie, that it's the end result of biological processes) are correct? Funny, that consciousness is the one thing you cannot deny exists, and yet it is so hard to quantify just exactly what it is and/or represents, and/or it's true nature/origin. It is a thing that science cannot deny exists, and yet cannot seem to get a clear handle on, with any known scientific model.

Do we have a chicken and egg question.. which came first, consciousness, or biology? I mean, of course, you will need to have biology in the process, but what if that biological structure is simply the screen upon which consciousness is projected, or contained and/or filtered through? So, in reality, perhaps we have a universe filled with a "clear light of consciousness", perhaps the very background underlying energy matrix underlying all energy and matter (matter is simply compressed energy, anyways) IS consciousness. Unexpressed, unindividuated, timeless (perhaps time is merely a necessary construct, the stage upon which the experience of our filtered, individuated life plays out upon) consciousness. And we are vessels which "tune" aspects of this consciousness, according to our individuated frequencies, and that the nature of this conciousness is to remember what it has always known but forgotten or never yet known (through the limited "consciousnesses" of less efficient tune-vessels.. lower life forms, maybe even relatively "inert" mass, like stones and gases), to realize and Gno the truth of our singularity despite our individuation, IAMTHATIAM, the infinite fractal that scales micro and macro, one and many.

Sorry if I got kindof rambly, and malformed in my thoughts on this, but I am just throwing out some ideas.

Peace & Divinity
Love is the Law, Love Under Will

Baudeaux Machs

[mouthwater]

Originally Posted by baudmax

Well, exactly what _is_ consciousness, and is there anything to indicate that current cultural assumptions about it ( ie, that it's the end result of biological processes) are correct?

Consciousness can never be explained objectively because we are stuck in it. We can be consciously observing our consciousness, or consciously observing the fact that we are consciously observing our consciousness, but because it is inescapable, any "true" objective definition or understanding of it will remain impossible.

I have mixed feelings as to whether or not this is a great or terrible thing.

[baudmax]

Originally Posted by mouthwater

Consciousness can never be explained objectively because we are stuck in it. We can be consciously observing our consciousness, or consciously observing the fact that we are consciously observing our consciousness, but because it is inescapable, any "true" objective definition or understanding of it will remain impossible.

I have mixed feelings as to whether or not this is a great or terrible thing.

Well, it seems we are limited in our observation, on the scale of the perspective, but the only alternative is to not be conscious, not perceive, it seems. And there's no provable guarantee of that either. So you can be more or less conscious by degrees, and on the one hand scale down to different 'aspects' or tendencies that comprise the self, or scale up to an awareness that reaches so far beyond the self as to encompass all (selves). Perhaps the "purpose" many assume (finding "the answer of the purpose"), is not the purpose afterall. It seems a great need of humanity to 'understand', but perhaps what we need to understand are the lessons which our experience is demonstrating to us. Are we hung up on dissecting the stylized components of the "theater and moviemaking", the lighting angles, whether it's animated or color or B&W, qunatifying the graininess of the film etc, while losing sight of the plot/parable, which comprise the real intent of why the movie was made to begin with? What do we take away from this "movie of life"? Perhaps the only objectivity is in unconsciousness, because even objectively observable events can be interpreted any myriad subjective number of ways and yet each version, absolutely convincing, because we see it the way we most want to see it, and we will always perceive the 'facts' through this subjective lens (even scientifically, when we fail to consider alternative models which might more accurately reflect 'objective' data which conflicts the assumption). But I find all my optimism comes from my subjective self... subjectivity is the wellspring of personal intent and motivation. Objectively, you divorce yourself from the outcome, you strive to merely "observe" (well, you strive to, but your perception will always be tainted by conceptual prejudices); You are at best a pair of eyes watching a chunk of ice flying through space, or be the chunk of ice flying through space, or at home on the couch watching television feeling hopeless to stop the horrorshow you see rapidly unfolding before you. Subjectively, you feel, you desire, you want, you love, you act, on account that you have a vested interest in the outcome so feel inclined to influence it; Subjectivity IS consciously willful and deciding and choosing. A subject IS and DOES, it takes willful action on it's behalf to control its destiny; It reacts in It's own best interests. An object merely responds to inertia and the forces surrounding it, and is cynical (unconscious) to the concept of any possibility of changing the course set by external forces. Perhaps "the point" is to learn that consciousness bestows the power to control (both create and destroy) reality itself, that an individual has limitless power for good or bad, if they realize it and act upon it. I sense a sort of purpose, a liberation in consciousness to liberate all consciousness (the highest ideals of man), from those who monopolize conscious awareness by actively seeking to minimize it in others (keeping us asleep, so that they can continue to profit easily by parasitizing off our efforts/energy). These things I sense about "the point" are an awakening to the need to be more willful in in my efforts to shape the world to be a better place, to aspire to be a better person. To move beyond that cruel ironic feeling from my first trips (the noble sadness -- awe and wonder seeing the great potential of man, and the sadness of seeing the state of things the way they are, functionally, in the world of man; the passive realization that "it doesn't have to be that way" becomes more "I don't have to let it be that way").

We can't ever fully escape 'consciousness', and perhaps never understand if it does in fact have any higher purpose than the quality of life us meat puppets experience within the scaffold of time; but perhaps being an active agency to creating the world as it _should_ be will open a larger perception on man levels where a higher purpose will be ripe for the revealing.

Peace & Divinity
Baudeaux Machs

[Strungreality]

The mind in mushroom told me that experience was the point.

[AntiAimer]

The point of life, is to live life. DUH! =P

Going to work everyday all day, till one is dead is not life.(But has been adopted by society to live a 'normal' life, so is part of the human life) LAWS are only life, in the unwritten book that really only one can make.(No one can make laws for others to follow) Life is makeing life. Liveing life how you want it, thinking for now and not when your dead. Once your dead life means nothing more then a past time. Life never dies, will always live till there is no matter for life to live with\on. Life is about liveing and surviveing, untill one can't go on(becomeing old and dieing, ect) Life doesn't mean makeing something out of yourself for others pleasure and your own. Thats ego or personality, which has become adapted to mans meaning of life. Life is what you make of it. There is no one answer to why life(liveing organisms) are alive nor is there a answer to why the world and the many other worlds where made. The world is liveing, so it has a life with alot of bad and good memorys. Doesn't really have a choice like a human. Is there a reason WHY? Smurf asks why does there have to be a reason? Just because we can think dosen't mean there must be a reason...animals are not here for us to just eat nor is oxygen only here for us to breathe. There's many many reason....some think it's all a PLAN of the so called GOD. Others think it's here just because...with Life brings you the choice to accept what you want as being true. Life doesnt evovle just around facts. It's a cycle, that brings negative and postive reactions.

Really there is no life, just a word man made up. At any rate one must make his own views on life, or else how are they liveing it? Then there just following somone elses views on the what life is, and is that liveing life? Choices, thoughts, experiences and everything that comes with it, is life.

LIFE! "The story of my life."

[XtomX]

I think science can play an important role in helping us define our perception on what the meaning of life is. I'm no expert, and couldn't expand on this to well, but just reading things on brain chemistry, psychology and the origin of the universe and conciousness is very enlightining.

[augentier]

It's completely natural for humans to question purpose and life and everything else. That's how religions start..people have been questioning things since they've been on Earth. Ancient peoples saw the sun rising and thought, "Why is the sun rising? It gives warmth and helps things grow and blah blah" .. so they attributed its amazing "powers" to a godlike spirit. A little off topic but that's an example of how people have been questioning since the beginning.

I think it's good that we all question, because it keeps our interest in life and encourages us to get out there and see what there is to see, to experience, whathaveyou. As to finding answers, I think everyone's answers are wrong. Maybe a hint of the truth, but in whole the answers are all wrong. None of us are dead, so we don't know if we find out the meaning of life after death, or if there is even anything after life. We can have our idea, but we never really know. That's actually what makes questioning kinda fun - there are endless possibilities, and even some of the craziest ones can seem to make sense

[upperdecker]

I don't know what the point is but this is something i think about. Just think about how your dog (if you have one)and how it views the world/his/her life. He/She pretty much has no idea whats going on compared to how we view life. They just know to survive and to mate. Now I think about that and then think about how we view our world/counciousness. I think there's a whole lot that we don't know/see/or can comprehend while stuck in our own counscousness/life/world. It's like asking a retard to solve for x (not trying to be rude). We have no idea what lies beneath this life/state of counciousness. Of course ther'e's no proof of an afterlife but come on, we only know what we have learned here on earth. Earth is such a tiny piece of the puzzle. I feel we haven't even began to understand what we are/what we think we know compared to what really is out there. I believe there's definitely soooooo much about our whole existence/universe that we will never find out. Just like how you talk to your dog and they don't know what your saying (well some might), thats how I think of us. Thats the best way I can put it. We just have no idea what lies beneath all of this stuff we call life.

[El Calico Loco]

Why do we exist? Because. The reason the universe exists is so that one can eat, sleep, fuck, take drugs, and post on message forums. Does there need to be any other reason?

Maybe so, or maybe not. But I like this gedanken:

Atoms are made of energy (fundamentally).
Molecules are made of atoms.
Cells are made of molecules.
Organs are made of cells.
Animals - including humans - are made of organs.

So, to continue the pattern...

X1s are made of humans.
X2s are made of X1s.
X3s are made of X2s.
...
XNs are made of X(N-1)s.
GOD is made of XNs.

True? False? N=?


ECL

Reputation Comments on this post:

cool thoughts!

[Nicaine]

Originally Posted by dip

Of course, we've all questioned what's the point of life? Why are we here?
How did the universe begin? What's beyond the universe? ect ...

Anyway, SWIM was just thinking, mabey we shouldn't have evolved this far? Considering our weak structure, we barely made it with the lucky addition of thumbs, and using our physical organ the brain to think past the physically superior animals with their low IQ.

Does anyone think that coming so far as to question our own existence seems unatural?

I think life was alot simplier when we existed as rocks.

There's a common (almost universal) assumption that we are somehow more advanced than other species because of our unique abilities profile. Has anyone ever considered the possibility that we may in fact be the most *complex* but LEAST advanced species, if advanced means ability to survive as a species (rather than our own self-invented criteria)?

IMO, inventing the atomic bomb is a good sign that high intelligence may be a temporary "wrong turn" taken by evolution, and will eventually be corrected. Not to mention global warming and destruction of the planet. We are certainly the species with the most hubris and desire to take over and abuse/exploit every square inch of planetary resources, not to mention use/abuse other species as if they were our toys. Is THIS advancement? I could come up with many other examples, but the point has been made.

To sum up -- yes, maybe we shouldn't have evolved this far. We have not aided or done anything whatsoever positive for the Earth or its other species -- we only destroy. There may not even be any more evolution soon, thanks to us.

[El Calico Loco]

Originally Posted by Nicaine

To sum up -- yes, maybe we shouldn't have evolved this far. We have not aided or done anything whatsoever positive for the Earth or its other species -- we only destroy. There may not even be any more evolution soon, thanks to us.

I don't believe "we" do anything. There are individuals out there who do evil things, both to other humans and to the world at large, but not every human deserves to be condemned because of the actions of some. Think about Jesus, Buddha, or Mr. Rogers. Destroyers? I think not.

Intelligence is nothing without Knowledge. I've met plenty of people who, upon realizing that their IQ was higher than most, became intellectually lazy and arrogant. They didn't feel the need to actually, you know, know anything. They trusted too much in their own magnificient abilities. Lacking any breadth of premises, these types often begin with bad premises and wind up with horrible conclusions despite their flawless logic. Sometimes those with the highest IQs can be the narrowest of ideologues.

Intelligence combined with Knowledge is powerful - but this combination is dangerous without Virtue. If one doesn't care about one's fellow beings, then this combination makes one capable of greater evil than any common criminal could deliver.

I think most of the evil of humanity is caused by those who don't use their intellect to gather knowledge and virtue. It's caused by those who default to the selfish animal brain, whether the simple lizard-brain (common thugs) or the more complex primate brain (territorial, demanding uniformity and conformity). Though smarter than animals - and thus far more dangerous - these individuals are no more emotionally mature than animals. They're like tigers with better brains, and they prey on the herd that's too blind and foolish to turn against them en masse (there's the selfish animal brain, again - fear, this time).

But everyone, save the most damaged sociopathic mutant, has at least a little of the God-brain in them. I don't mean that in some mystical sense; I refer only to that part of our brains that wants to see the species as a whole survive and prosper, not just our individual DNA (the goal of the selfish animal brain). It's where "Love Thy Neighbor" comes from.

If we are to survive as a species, I think we need to heed that phrase. Humans need to learn to extend the love they naturally feel for kin and close friends to every person on the planet, and to the world as a whole. It's the next step in evolution, if there is to be one. And though it's very difficult to actually feel that way, it's not so difficult to behave as if one does.

On the other hand, I've also met many who've become embittered by the actions of the selfish animalmen in the world. These types tend to be more intelligent and sensitive than most, but their righteous anger leads them to embrace the Devil-brain - a desire to see the human race extinct. I understand the misanthropy, believe me...but it's an error in logic. It's blaming the whole for the action of parts. It comes from the same instict as racism, sexism, and most other 'isms.


ECL

[Nicaine]

Originally Posted by El Calico Loco

I don't believe "we" do anything. There are individuals out there who do evil things, both to other humans and to the world at large, but not every human deserves to be condemned because of the actions of some. Think about Jesus, Buddha, or Mr. Rogers. Destroyers? I think not.

AFAIK we were talking about the species as a whole, not individuals within it. Anyway, the people you mentioned mostly did positive things *for other human beings*, which I didn't claim was entirely lacking in the species.

It's worth pointing out as well that we glorify our heroes, and don't really know what Jesus or Buddha really did or what their motivation was.

Intelligence combined with Knowledge is powerful - but this combination is dangerous without Virtue.

This attribute you call "virtue" is human-conceived and nonexistent without a human brain to cognize it. If the human species weren't around, there would be no need for it, and in fact no existence of either "sin" or "virtue." So both of these are just further proof humans are complex, ridiculously so. Much, much more complex than is needed for the survival or success of a species. So much that we've seen this so-called "intelligence" put the whole planet at risk of destruction.

[El Calico Loco]

Originally Posted by Nicaine

This attribute you call "virtue" is human-conceived and nonexistent without a human brain to cognize it. If the human species weren't around, there would be no need for it, and in fact no existence of either "sin" or "virtue." So both of these are just further proof humans are complex, ridiculously so. Much, much more complex than is needed for the survival or success of a species. So much that we've seen this so-called "intelligence" put the whole planet at risk of destruction.

True. In a planet with nothing but sheep an wolves, there would be only the animal. Nothing would care about anything other than the survival of itself, and possibly its offspring; conversely, no creature would actively seek its own species's destruction. There would be no "god" or "devil", only the self-centered animal.

I have my misanthropic moments; I think anyone who can see the evil in the world must. Still, I think the planet Earth is more interesting with humans in it; they may create pollution and poverty and fanaticism and war, but they also create music and poems and stories and games. I don't see much of interest at all in a planet filled with nothing but deer. BORING!!!

I do wish some humans behaved better. So many are still ruled by fear, anger, greed, and envy. It's childish, pathetic, and sad.


ECL

[Nicaine]

Originally Posted by El Calico Loco

I have my misanthropic moments; I think anyone who can see the evil in the world must. Still, I think the planet Earth is more interesting with humans in it; they may create pollution and poverty and fanaticism and war, but they also create music and poems and stories and games. I don't see much of interest at all in a planet filled with nothing but deer. BORING!!!

Of course not... you're a human being (social species), so you see interest and meaning in a planet filled with other human beings and what you/they value (such as music, poems, art, etc).

Nothing surprising there at all, I feel the same way of course. I just don't believe this is a species destined to last too long; ALL species go extinct eventually (I forgot the average figure) and I think homo sapiens will probably last a far shorter time than the dinosaurs.

[stoneinfocus]

Good point (sorry didn´t read, but the 1st post) in questioning the "naturality" of questioning the nature of it all ;-) .

It´s exactly my point of view, that the human mind is is only weapon he has to use, to survive and any holding back of it, to not further this instrument to the true nature of huan life, means to die the next occasion the resulting weakness is to be exposed.

Soooo, the low IQ animal is one, that has its excellent physical properties and instincts completely adapted to its enviroment, or has developed a physique and senses by hazard, that allows it to exist in this enviroment, without further ado.

Notice, that not too much is changed within the system, the system bears it and takes care of it, or drops it.

the human mind has the ability to challange nature, his own nature (and this is a part of the whole universe and the laws of nature as such, as it might seem to be a law, that something fighting all laws is a law) and the enviroment.... we´re able to extinguish our existence nearly completly by thermo nuclear warfare, etc. ... .

If the human came to the conclusion, that all, but the most rudimental weapons and means that do not alter the nature too much were appropiate, then he would be closest to nature as such (like native americans et al.), but then again, there´s always that little thing with thinking, that every thought that can be thought, will be executed in some aerea under some circumstances (I always wonder if the circumstances allows it to happen or vive versa, it´s just for _it_ to happen i.e. dacaptation, witch-burtning, KZ-docotors, wheeling) and in fact, anything imaginable has been done by humans to humans in little and large scale within and without the public will.

As I see it, there´s no real sense this is our way, to explore any possibility and make use of it until some sort of whatever equilibrium is achieved between some esoteric forces of survival and destruction, happyness and suffering, liberty and slavery.. unfortuntealy it seems to be too complicated for the average Joe to let it all go and experiecing it at a smooth level without too much harm done in relation to the status quo and the further perspecives of leaving it be, hindreing it or giving it its will.

So I think since our onyl choice is to always fight, either our nature to fight our phenotypical nature of fighting the nature, or fighting the nature as such, ..., our destiny is to fail at some point or to live eternally, if we only grow intelligent enough, but the latter isn´t going to happen, imho, so have fun, nothing really matters!

[El Calico Loco]

Originally Posted by Nicaine

Nothing surprising there at all, I feel the same way of course. I just don't believe this is a species destined to last too long; ALL species go extinct eventually (I forgot the average figure) and I think homo sapiens will probably last a far shorter time than the dinosaurs.

Not necessarily. We have the capability to do something the dinosaurs could not - migrate into space. So long as we're confined to this planet (a Type 0 civilization), we're at risk of extinction.

Migrating outward might also take some of the pressures off the Earth. Going into space en masse would teach lessons to both political camps, I think: one, that the Earth is very small, somewhat fragile, and precious; two, that there is plenty of space in the universe for us, and thus no need to wish for human extinction.

On the other hand...




ECL