Kicking the can...

[antaeus]

This is primarily a personal investigation into the meaning of everything. With this in mind, I'm not entirely sure what I'm saying here, but it might come out of the conversation...

I'm interested in a concept I'm calling maintenance (you're welcome to come up with a better word, or to point me towards some nihilist thinker who might have a better word)

At its essence, by maintenance I am referring to the idea that we're given* things when we're born and as we grow and develop. We maintain them for a period of time, refine them, improve or degrade them, then we hand them on. Those things could be genes, or some of the organic materials we're born with, materials that have been travelling with our genetic line for millennia. It could be the unique patchwork of barely alive viruses that are kind of part of us, or that have been absorbed by us, or the genetic lineage of our biome in general.

This all works for the coincidence that is life. The accidental ball of chemical and electrical interactions that began those billions of years ago, with no other purpose other than to continue to refine itself. But I think the idea doesn't end there. Much like I was given a bunch of selfish DNA that I maintain for a period of time, I am also given culture. I am given language, personality traits. I take those traits, I maintain, modify, improve and degrade, and pass them on to others. Much like the DNA in a saber-toothed cat, some of the modifications I make to culture aren't ideal, but I pass them on all the same. And while I don't have much of a say in the language I'm given, or my culture in general, there certainly is intent. Intent on the part of those who give it to me, and intent by me on what I pass on to others around me.

Unlike a staphylococcus bacteria, I have the ability purposely change, evolve, develop the things I'm given. As the collection of things I and others have been given to maintain develops over time, the list of things that can be purposely changed grows. I can now take a supplement that messes with the staphylococcus bacteria I was given during birth. Or, if I choose, I can purposely reduce myself to the base elements that I am made up of - which is itself a form of maintenance (I was given them, I'm passing them on in a modified format) - A stone couldn't do this, neither could a staphylococcus bacteria.

Whether we're improving or degrading the things we're given is subjective to a degree. One could consider that me passing on the iron in my body to the bacteria and fungi that disassemble it as a good thing. The DNA in me might disagree if this disassembly accidentally prevents it from being passed on and it degrades into it's base elements.

I think there is a certain morality involved. I haven't quite pinned it down. But I feel like the more I pass on the better - that my maintenance of the things that make me up ensures that most of what I am given is passed on. Certainly this is true of culture. Culture is fragile and fragmented. It is not an element. It doesn't exist without life - whereas the gold in my body came from a star and I'll be passing it on in some form whatever I do. They do overlap in subjective ways. Is it better for me to do my best to hand on my DNA, rather than just pass on a collection of atoms? I think morality functions within this framework as an assessment of what I have passed on, and whether those have enabled continued existence - for example continued existence of culture, or a culture. Which leads to that whole conversation about what traits are beneficial to culture.

I need a question... Are we just kicking the can down the road? Is the purpose of existence to just maintain itself until the cold heat death at the end of time? Am I just being nihilistic in my void of religiously defined moral purpose? Or does maintenance, particularly of the cultural aspects of our existence provide us with purpose enough to give meaning and moral framework to our existence?







* In the universal "Ooh look at that stone on the side of the road, I'll have that" way. Not necessarily in the "I am a god, I'll leave a stone on the road for that person to find" way. But I guess that's open for discussion too.

[basics]

antaeus,

Well if you really believe that you are from a collection of accidental coming together of chemical and electrical interactions then the big question is what's your purpose in life, why? Because chemicals and electricity don't think as we do to make decisions that enhance anything. That is why the very notion of billions of years has come into play regarding what purpose we have in life. Oh it may seem to millions of us humans what exactly is that purpose for each do have one and that's where a world view comes in. For example I believe there is a God Who made all things and did so for a purpose. Others do not. Knowing God explains that purpose. Not knowing Him raises such questions that you and many others ask and never seem to get an answer.

[Akar]

Well if you really believe that you are from a collection of accidental coming together of chemical and electrical interactions then the big question is what's your purpose in life, why?

No person has an inherent "purpose" in life (aside from the goal all life has, passing on it's genes), which is what allows us to each ascribe our own meaning and purpose to life. You can decide what, if any, purpose you have in life. If you decide you want to sit around doing nothing until you die in hopes of getting into heaven, that's your prerogative. If you want to travel the world and experience different cultures, that's okay too.

Because chemicals and electricity don't think as we do to make decisions that enhance anything.

Except that they do, clearly, since we're sitting here having this conversation.

I need a question... Are we just kicking the can down the road? Is the purpose of existence to just maintain itself until the cold heat death at the end of time?

"existence" doesn't have a purpose, it's simply a result of the nature of physics and matter. "life" as we know it does have a purpose, which is to replicate itself and carry on it's genes to the next generation. Beyond that, all of our goals in life are simply added layers of complexity to that primary goal. That doesn't mean an individual doesn't have purpose, just that that purpose comes from the biological drive to pass on genetic information.

[Prodromos]

A: I'm an atheist. I don't believe in fairy tales.
B: What's a fairy tale?
A: It's that which, when you stop believing in it, goes away.
B: So your life has no purpose or meaning?
A: My life has purpose and meaning. It's just I give it to myself.
B: So once you stop believing in it, it goes away? So the fact that your life has purpose and meaning is just a fairy tale you tell yourself?

Study: Atheists Find Meaning In Life By Inventing Fairy Tales

The 2018 study in question by David Speed, et al, “What Do You Mean, ‘What Does It All Mean?’ Atheism, Nonreligion, and Life Meaning,” used surveys to try to figure out if atheists find meaning in life or are nihilistic. This survey defined someone as nihilistic if he or she upheld the position: “In my opinion, life does not serve any purpose.”

This study found that atheists and non-religious people are not nihilistic, because they claimed that they did have a purpose in life. This is an interesting finding that seems to refute the oft-repeated charge (levied by religious folks) that atheists are nihilistic.

However, there is a problem with this finding. The survey admitted the meaning that atheists and non-religious people found in their lives is entirely self-invented. According to the survey, they embraced the position: “Life is only meaningful if you provide the meaning yourself.”

Thus, when religious people say non-religious people have no basis for finding meaning in life, and when non-religious people object, saying they do indeed find meaning in life, they are not talking about the same thing. If one can find meaning in life by creating one’s own meaning, then one is only “finding” the product of one’s own imagination. One has complete freedom to invent whatever meaning one wants.

This makes “meaning” on par with myths and fairy tales. It may make the non-religious person feel good, but it has no objective existence.

...

But apparently many atheists and non-religious people have a hunger for meaning and a sense of moral rectitude that their worldview cannot satisfy. Sure, they are free to invent their own meaning and morality, but then they should be honest and admit that their meaning and morality has no advantage over the meaning or morality religious people put forward —or for that matter, it has no advantage over the meaning and purpose evil people invent. Their self-created meanings are every bit as much “fairy stories” as the religious ones they like to lampoon.

@OP:

I would say that since atheism entails nihilism, if you seek meaning in your life, you're not going to find it as an atheist.

Two of the best Christians I know are former atheists who upon realizing that atheism necessarily ends in nihilism, started looking at what else might explain human existence, which in their case led to Christianity.

[Akar]

This makes “meaning” on par with myths and fairy tales. It may make the non-religious person feel good, but it has no objective existence.

I really hope religious people see the irony in statements like these

[antaeus]

I would say that since atheism entails nihilism, if you seek meaning in your life, you're not going to find it as an atheist.

Two of the best Christians I know are former atheists who upon realizing that atheism necessarily ends in nihilism, started looking at what else might explain human existence, which in their case led to Christianity.

I can explain human existence without religion: Big bang -> A series of coincidences -> me writing this post. The tricky part for me, is whether meaning can be drawn out of that explanation, and in particular: whether any broader meaning is even necessary?

[Akar]

whether meaning can be drawn out of that explanation

I think history has shown that humans can attempt to extract meaning from literally anything.

whether any broader meaning is even necessary?

Nothing is necessary, cosmically speaking. Relevancy increases as the scale decreases.

[basics]

Akar,

You said that life has no purpose but to pass on its genes, yet is that not a purpose? And then you finish with life does have a primary goal so what is it? The thing is ole chap that your friend Darwin attempts to show you that life does have a purpose in saying it's all about the survival of the fittest which means in my ole brain that I have to work to be fitter to survive. If I stay the same unfit character what happens when some other bloke bashes me over the head and kills me? Life my friend is about using your brain to gather as much information as possible to be better than the guy you work for or abide near, to get hold of the best looking bird to spend the rest of your life with. Bird by the way was another term for a female when I was growing up. It didn't matter what state her genes were in as long as she was a good looker. The thing is that I may once have thought like you but not now, why? The simple answer is that the Person Who made me and you put me on my knees one evening to reveal what His Son did for me on a cross some two thousand years ago thus changing my perspective of life for ever. In Jesus Christ I now know that my life did have a purpose and that it is coming to that purpose not long from now.

[Akar]

You said that life has no purpose but to pass on its genes, yet is that not a purpose?

Yes, that is a purpose. That's why I said "has no purpose but". By the way, when I say "life" I don't mean existence and the universe, I mean a specific living organism.

And then you finish with life does have a primary goal so what is it?

To pass on genes, like I said...

The thing is ole chap that your friend Darwin attempts to show you that life does have a purpose in saying it's all about the survival of the fittest which means in my ole brain that I have to work to be fitter to survive.

Well, no. That's not at all what Darwin says or what "survival of the fittest" means. Darwin defines "fitness" as "reproductive success", which means that that which is most likely to reproduce is most likely to survive.

If I stay the same unfit character what happens when some other bloke bashes me over the head and kills me?

Again, I don't think you understand what "survival of the fittest" means...

It didn't matter what state her genes were in as long as she was a good looker.

Good genes are exactly what makes someone a good looker...

The simple answer is that the Person Who made me and you put me on my knees one evening to reveal what His Son did for me on a cross some two thousand years ago thus changing my perspective of life for ever. In Jesus Christ I now know that my life did have a purpose and that it is coming to that purpose not long from now.

Completely irrelevant.

[Cope]

Yes, that is a purpose. That's why I said "has no purpose but". By the way, when I say "life" I don't mean existence and the universe, I mean a specific living organism.

Why do you consider reproductive functions purposeful, but not other biological expressions? In a system which exists as a consequence of "coincidence" all actions can be regarded as arbitrary and/or meaningless.

To pass on genes, like I said...

Seems like circular logic. The purpose of life is to produce life.

Good genes are exactly what makes someone a good looker...

Are you implying that attractiveness isn't determined, at least in part, by constructed social standards?

Completely irrelevant.

Entirely relevant. Purpose through the Word is the only way to be at one with yourself, the universe and the Lord.

[AqD]

Human is far too complicated and since we're all humans (or pretend to be) the observations are probably biased.

We should talk about simpler life forms first, such as cockroaches. What purpose of life could they possibly have?

[basics]

AqD,

Well like some others they clean up the messes others leave behind making them very important to the environment.

[Akar]

Why do you consider reproductive functions purposeful, but not other biological expressions? In a system which exists as a consequence of "coincidence" all actions can be regarded as arbitrary and/or meaningless.

Things can have purpose in a system that has no purpose.

Seems like circular logic. The purpose of life is to produce life.

There is no inherent purpose to life in the sense that it wasn't created for any reason, it just exists. But every living organism has a goal, which is to survive and to replicate itself.

Are you implying that attractiveness isn't determined, at least in part, by constructed social standards?

Sure, it's determined in part by that. But those social standards are elaborate versions of the simple mating rituals that birds and other animals use. There's no effective difference between a bird sticking twigs in it's feathers to attract a mate and a human in skinny jeans and a nirvana t-shirt going out on the town. Even attractive physical features are determined, in part, by our reproductive needs. Hence why men are naturally attracted towards large hips and big breasts and other features.

[basics]

Akar,

So, if I came to your house and took anything that caught my eye from you, you would stand back and do nothing? All that you have gathered for yoursel is purposeless and meaningless? I don't think so. But then your argument changes in that we do have a purpose in life, recreation being the objective and here's where it becomes difficult. What if you're unable to recreate as many couples find does she just dump you or you her and move on to another? You see life goes on whether you can recreate or not so it must have more than recreation in it's purpose. Oh and just as an afterthought, the most beautiful women I have ever known didn't have large breasts or large hips or a big bum.

[antaeus]

I think most of us can separate possessions we own, from our feelings about the purpose of the universe, or of life. I'm not convinced that being nihilistic about the big picture exempts us from being nostalgic about that favourite piece of glassware that you inherited from your grandparents.

The alternative is a situation whereby after realising that there is no point to the universe, I sit down and stare at the wall until I starve to death.

I think you mistake Akar, who to my eye is saying that things may have purpose within a purposeless system. That roof over your head keeps out the rain. The clothes I'm wearing keep me warm. The door on my house stops you from stealing my stuff. There is purpose, even if there is no greater meaning.

[Akar]

Antaeus is completely correct. Purpose can be found even within a purposeless system.

I'm not convinced that being nihilistic about the big picture exempts us from being nostalgic about that favourite piece of glassware that you inherited from your grandparents.

I'd say that it's one of the things that allows us to feel that way. Understanding the inherent meaningless of the universe allows us to ascribe our own meaning and purpose to life outside of the continuance of our biological functions. We've evolved to a point where we longer have to focus our entire energy on food, shelter, and reproduction and can focus on deeper things. Even if those deeper things are ultimately unimportant in the grand scheme of things. We as people and society get to decide what we value as important and what we don't.

the most beautiful women I have ever known didn't have large breasts or large hips or a big bum.

This (the difference in perceived attraction) is a necessary and important thing as well, since it increases the chances of every person finding a mate.

You see life goes on whether you can recreate or not so it must have more than recreation in it's purpose.

Yes, life goes on and yours ends. Your genealogy ends there with your purpose unfulfilled. Other life forms will continue on, attempting to fulfill their purpose or die trying. There will always be evolutionary failures who die off without reproducing, that doesn't disprove the theory and is one of the most integral aspects of it.

[wanderwegger]

First thread I’ve read on here worth the time. In the practical the meaning of life seems to a stumbling irrational possessive greed, overindulgence of petty rivalries and addictions occasionally punctuated by astonishing acts of wonder beyond what nature seems to have gifted to all the other beings of the Earth.

God is unknowable and whether the universe has a purpose or not is one of two great mysteries. We likely do not beyond the biologic. Believing in easily disprovable supernatural schema fills the time but will always be open to ridicule and most often surpassed by those wedded to the world we can measure and experience.

Purpose, as most dreams, is water not stone.

[basics]

wanderwegger,

Was Jesus Christ really unknowable? The greatest Figure to ever walk the planet, Who did Supernatural things and is still doing Supernatural things all across this planet and He's unknowable? Friend grab a Bible and read it for in it you will see that He, Jesus Christ, is your Maker and in time, your Judge.

[Akar]

Read a copy of Lord of the Rings and you'll get to know Aragorn and friends, and you might actually benefit from reading it versus reading the bible

[antaeus]

I'm fairly certain alcohol was my maker. That and the back seat of my fathers 1980 Ford Escort. It had mag wheels and a spoiler.

I'm sure there was purpose in the choice of mag wheels. Perhaps not an understanding of consequence. But certainly purpose.