"Uprooted"

[Age]

I suppose we can all agree to those things. Is there anyone here who disagrees with the statements above?

K; the problem with these things that ''everyone'' can agree to, is that they say
nothing... ok, we all need the necessities... AND.... there is nothing beyond
this... it leads us nowhere... what can we all agree to that actually means
something... something actually worth living for, or even dying for?
how do we build upon this to actually be worth the energy of thinking about
them?

Kropotkin

They say nothing controversial. There are things that are controversial. For example, I might think that everyone needs a Rolls Royce (just to pick a random example) and others may disagree with that statement and I might doggedly defend that statement until I die of ulcers from worrying about it. I mean, I don't know. Maybe keeping things simple and modest is fair game, at least for a start.

What can be agreed with and accepted by every one shows 'what is Truly important' in Life.

[Age]

The term "uprooted" is a term that Heidegger sometimes used to describe the status of people living in "modernity" or contemporary culture. I suppose the idea is that one is without firm ground under one's feet and that is, overall, something seemingly unsustainable or undesirable. But, in keeping with the metaphorical aspects of the term, is there firm ground in life? If, so, then what or where is it? If not, is it better to live under a false belief that there is than to be aware of the fragile or otherwise shifting ground one is standing on?

Wittgenstein used the terms 'hinges' and 'riverbeds' to denote that there must be a ground [not absolute] to reality within a Framework and System of reality, i.e. to life.

I believe that is what "unhinged" meant metaphorically;
=mentally unbalanced; deranged.

I believe if we survey the whole of reality from the Big Bang

But why only survey a tiny minuscule fraction of the whole Reality? Doing so will only lead you somewhat astray. Or, provide you will only a very narrowed perspective of things.

via evolution to the present with relative determinism, we should be able to determine the 'hinges' and 'riverbeds' of reality and life.
In a way, if we understand the naturally contours and features of the river-bed of life, we need to flow optimally in alignment with it, i.e. not crashing to the river banks, swirled by whirlpools and knocked terribly by rocks in the river of life.

Thus Buddhism recommends in a way, the Middle-Way as the optimal.

But you recommend only 'surveying' a tiny part of all of the 'river bed'.

Which partly explains why you have very narrowed views and perspectives of things in this forum.

[Walker]

is there firm ground in life?

Rationality.