But that is just Socrates's observation that an unexamined life is not worth living - something of which most people on philosophy forums are well aware. Why do you think I am here? I have burning questions of interest and, just like you, am frustrated at how few people want to speak about these things. As an analytical nerd, do you think I'm not frustrated with peoples' focus on the everyday and practical?Reflex wrote: ↑Fri May 25, 2018 9:43 am Really, Greta?
I'm beginning to suspect if secularists paid less attention words and more attention to their context and meaning, they wouldn't hyperventilate when someone calls MS-13 gangsters "animals" or says something esoteric like "to be fully human is to be more than human."
When man fails to discriminate the ends of his mortal striving, he finds himself functioning on the animal level of existence. He has failed to avail himself of the superior advantages of that material acumen, moral discrimination, and spiritual insight which are an integral part of his cosmic-mind endowment as a personal being.
If theists spent more time reading others' posts rather than railroading them, they wouldn't hyperventilate about the straw man idea that non-believers lead unexamined lives. Note the number of unquestioning theists whose mindsets and conceptions are similarly limited and locked in to dogma as the atheists who cannot tolerate any lack of orthodoxy in laypersons.
Those leading unexamined lives are just as valid as human beings as those who think about existence. Some roles in society do not need existential examination. Not everyone needs to be a thinker. Rest assured, the doers are similarly contemptuous of thinkers for being useless and impractical. In truth, thinkers and doers need each other and ideally would value the others' qualities.