The Existential Crisis

[Veritas Aequitas]

There are various meanings of what is an existential crisis.
Here is an argument to justify the substance of the existential crisis pulsating from an algorithm with the brain/mind of a person;

• 1. All humans are "programmed" [no God involved] to survive at all costs.

False. I think the evidence of millions of Jews in WW2 would disagree

I have missed out some details in this case which I had covered elsewhere.

In general, human will strive to survive "at all costs" [need qualification] at least until the inevitable or face a situation of hopelessness as in the case of the Jews in WW2 and in other cases.
Note the case of Stockholm Syndrome where prisoners will turned to favor their captors, i.e. to survive at all costs, else they will be killed if they resist.

Normally some will throw in counter like - what about suicide? That is an exception because that is a mental problem recognized by psychiatric.
There are various exceptions, but my P1 is very general.

2. To ensure survival, any awareness of a threat of death is triggered with terrible fears to ensure the individual find solutions to avoid premature death.

See above.

See the above re exceptions.

3. All humans are "programmed" with self-awareness.

4. Mortality [death] is a "certainty" [99.999999..999%].

5. Self-awareness [3] make one aware of mortality [death] [4].

6. Premise 5 triggers 2 but there is no possibility of solutions [2].

7. No possibility of a direct solution [6] pose a dilemma - a cognitive dissonance - which cannot be resolved, thus the existential crisis exuding subliminally.
[/list]

The above cognitive dissonance from the inherent existential crisis drives the majority into the theism and religions which provide instant relief to numb the terrible existential pains [Angst, anxieties, despair, hopelessness, etc.] of the sufferer.

The above existential crisis also drives many other psychological problems for humans, but that is another topic.

Views?

Many people are quite happy to come to terms with death. Why not you too?

As I had stated in the above post, in general, ALL humans are programmed not to fear death consciously at all times. If they do so, they are suffering from a mental problem - Thanatophobia.

The algorithm from the combination of 1-7 is an inherent and intrinsic to humans which pulses subliminally deep in the primal brain which humans cannot rationalize away by direct means. It is SO EVIDENT, the majority of humans 90% have resorted to the irrational belief God exists or cling to other religious beliefs to soothe the subliminal existential crisis.

Yes, there are many who can rationalize with death. They rely on very flimsy rational neural inhibitors [which are evolved relatively recently] to inhibit the primal pulses of the subliminal existential crisis. But these inhibitors can weaken under various conditions, e.g. stress, brain damage, atrophy with old age as in the point below:

Across the world, people have varying levels of belief (and disbelief) in God, with some nations being more devout than others. But new research reveals one constant across parts of the globe: As people age, their belief in God seems to increase.
https://www.livescience.com/19971-belie ... m-age.html

Don't be too arrogant and confident you can deal with the fact of death within the subliminal impulses [not conscious] from the existential crisis [factors 1-7] above.
Note the case of Anthony Flew, the once world most famous atheist whose rational inhibitors gave way and he was driven to belief in a God [deism] during the later part of his life.

[Veritas Aequitas]

There are various meanings of what is an existential crisis.
Here is an argument to justify the substance of the existential crisis pulsating from an algorithm with the brain/mind of a person;

• 1. All humans are "programmed" [no God involved] to survive at all costs.
  
  2. To ensure survival, any awareness of a threat of death is triggered with terrible fears to ensure the individual find solutions to avoid premature death.
  
  3. All humans are "programmed" with self-awareness.
  
  4. Mortality [death] is a "certainty" [99.999999..999%].
  
  5. Self-awareness [3] make one aware of mortality [death] [4].
  
  6. Premise 5 triggers 2 but there is no possibility of solutions [2].
  
  7. No possibility of a direct solution [6] pose a dilemma - a cognitive dissonance - which cannot be resolved, thus the existential crisis exuding subliminally.

The above cognitive dissonance from the inherent existential crisis drives the majority into the theism and religions which provide instant relief to numb the terrible existential pains [Angst, anxieties, despair, hopelessness, etc.] of the sufferer.

The above existential crisis also drives many other psychological problems for humans, but that is another topic.

Views?

You really need to learn how to construct an argument, that is a complete mess. There is no clear logical relationship between those things that you refer to as premises, and it's hard to even identify which component is supposed to be the conclusion (the word salad at position 7, or the unrelated and unsupported paragraph which follows).

What you have there is, at best, a set of bullet points for a powerpoint presentation for a high school atheism club.

Even when you rework this bullshit in your usual way (pointlessly repeating it in new words without addressing the logical problems at all) you cannot from that structure arrive at a necessary and sufficient case to support the claim that this explains religion, so your argument would be moot even if it were good. Which, I cannot stress strongly enough, it is not.

You are stupid and ignorant.

This is not a thesis paper, rather it is merely a philosophy forum where extreme rigor is not necessary.
What I presented are the main points.
There are loads of nuances to explain and sub-premises to include.

It is SO EVIDENT, the majority of humans 90% have resorted to the irrational belief "God exists as real" or cling to other religious beliefs to soothe the subliminal existential crisis.

If you are knowledgeable of the doctrines of these theistic and not-theistic religions, you will note they are connected to the points I raised, especially dealing with death and the thereafter. So me which theistic or non-theistic religions do not deal with death as a critical factor at all?

[Veritas Aequitas]

My view is that all the above data is knowledge.

Such knowledge will lead to wisdom to understand why the Jihadist will want to rape and murder you as a religious duty upon the command of his God [illusory] which he believed as driven by the existential crisis above.

Suggest you just stop going off tangent with my posts with your stupid ideas.

[Veritas Aequitas]

I don't expect you to agree to my arguments immediately...

Then I'm glad not to disappoint you. I really don't agree, because you've provided no evidence for your DNA theory, and DNA is far, far too complicated a thing to make wild assumptions about.

Here is my argument again [we have gone tru this before];

• 1. All humans are "programmed" [no God involved] to survive at all costs.
  2. To ensure survival, any awareness of a threat of death is triggered with terrible fears to ensure the individual find solutions to avoid premature death.
  3. All humans are "programmed" with self-awareness.
  4. Mortality [death] is a "certainty" [99.999999..999%].
  5. Self-awareness [3] make one aware of mortality [death] [4].
  6. Premise 5 triggers 2 but there is no possibility of solutions [2].
  7. No possibility of a direct solution [6] pose a dilemma which cannot be resolved, thus the existential crisis exuding subliminally.

Now show me which of the above premise is false thus my conclusion 7 will be false.

Well, first of all, you don't form any of them into syllogisms, so they aren't really "premises." That's the formal logical problem there. But 1 and 3 are devoid of evidence, 2 and 6 are contentious but unproven, 4 is just trite and obvious (except for the phony number, which is merely bizarre), 5 and 7 are ungrammatical and thus uninterpretable.

And the rational connection between any two of the premises is not indicated, and their relevance to the conclusion is not specified, because the whole thing isn't formed into a syllogism with middle terms. To put it metaphorically, the "connective tissue" of the "body of argument" here is entirely absent.

So I'd say there isn't a reason in any of the "premises" as worded for a rational interlocutor to think the conclusion is anything but arbitrary and imaginary.

And I don't say that to be cantankerous: I say it because you asked, and that's what it genuinely looks like from where I sit.

Thanks for the critic.
I was lazy as it takes time to present a well-organized argument.
I agree the above 'argument' is not well organized into proper syllogisms.
I thought you could re-organize them yourself, but I agree, the onus is on me to present it more systematically so the points flow more fluently.

Btw, I believe to present the premises more precisely, each will need a book size thesis to explain. Due to time constraints, I am presenting the barest skeletal points.

The following are evident facts;

• A. All humans are "programmed" with self-awareness.
  
  B. Mortality [death] is a "certainty" [99.999999..999%].
  
  C. Self-awareness [A] make one aware of mortality [death] [.B].

Here is the reorganized argument;

• 1. DNA/RNA wise, all humans are "programmed" [no God involved] to survive at all costs - at least till the inevitable or in cases of hopeless.
  
  2. To ensure survival, all humans need to avoid death, else terrible fears arise.
  
  3 To resolve the terrible fears, humans need to find effective solutions to avoid death.
  
  4. Humans are self-aware [A] of mortality [C] but cannot avoid death as in Mortality [.B], thus terrible fears arise permanently and subliminally [not consciously].
  
  5. The subliminal fears generate terrible pains and mental suffering indirectly as an existential crisis pulsating deep from within the primal brain.
  
  6. Without direct solutions to deal with the subliminal existential crisis, humans turned to various irrational beliefs and practice to soothe the associated pains and sufferings.

It is SO EVIDENT, the majority of humans 90% have resorted to the irrational belief "God exists as real" or cling to other religious beliefs to soothe the subliminal existential crisis.

If you are knowledgeable of the doctrines of these theistic and not-theistic religions, you will note they are connected to the points I raised, especially dealing with death and the thereafter. Show me which theistic or non-theistic religions do not deal with death as a critical factor at all?

4 is just trite and obvious (except for the phony number, which is merely bizarre)

It is true no human has lived beyond 150 years within known history but we [fallible beings] cannot claim 'mortality' is an absolute certainty.
According to Mills, we only arrived at that conclusion of mortality based on observations and induction, thus cannot be absolutely 100% certain, so my 99.999% certainty based on whatever is observed to date.

you've provided no evidence for your DNA theory, and DNA is far, far too complicated a thing to make wild assumptions about.

It is so evident all humans are naturally born with the impulse to survive as long as possible till the inevitable or in the exceptional cases of hopelessness or the suicidal which are mental issues.
Where did this impulse come from if not from the genetic codes in the DNA and the RNA?

[Skepdick]

4. Mortality [death] is a "certainty" [99.999999..999%].
...
It is true no human has lived beyond 150 years within known history but we [fallible beings] cannot claim 'mortality' is an absolute certainty.
According to Mills, we only arrived at that conclusion of mortality based on observations and induction, thus cannot be absolutely 100% certain, so my 99.999% certainty based on whatever is observed to date.

As the universe currently stands human mortality/death is a 100% certain fact. If you are older than 150, you are 100% certainly dead.

I am 100% certain of this given the sample size.. It's precisely our moral and ethical duty to falsify that fact in due time.

That's why life expectancy is one of the many metrics we are tracking.

On the cynical side of things, humans live longer now than they did 2000 years ago. So now you get to "enjoy" 70 years of existential crisis instead of 45.

[Veritas Aequitas]

4. Mortality [death] is a "certainty" [99.999999..999%].
...
It is true no human has lived beyond 150 years within known history but we [fallible beings] cannot claim 'mortality' is an absolute certainty.
According to Mills, we only arrived at that conclusion of mortality based on observations and induction, thus cannot be absolutely 100% certain, so my 99.999% certainty based on whatever is observed to date.

As the universe currently stands human mortality/death is a 100% certain fact. If you are older than 150, you are 100% certainly dead.

I am 100% certain of this given the sample size.. It's precisely our moral and ethical duty to falsify that fact in due time.

That's why life expectancy is one of the many metrics we are tracking.
Humans live longer now than they did 2000 years ago. So now you get to "enjoy" 70 years of existential crisis instead of 45.

I deny absolute certainty, thus my conservative 99.999...........9% certainty.

I agree within a defined framework one can be 100% but only relative to the defined conditions, e.g. your 'given sample size'.
Because it is merely relatively 100% certain, it cannot be absolutely certain at 100%.

[Skepdick]

I deny absolute certainty, thus my conservative 99.999...........9% certainty.

You have your Null and Alternative hypotheses backwards.

This is the fault of language, not thought.

I agree within a defined framework one can be 100% but only relative to the defined conditions, e.g. your 'given sample size'.
Because it is merely relatively 100%, it cannot be absolutely certain at 100%.

I am 100% certain that humans don't live to 150 years of age.

That's a falsifiable claim and it is a provisional certainty. When you produce an example of a living human older than 150 then I'll adjust it.

Strong opinions, weakly held

[Veritas Aequitas]

I deny absolute certainty, thus my conservative 99.999...........9% certainty.

You have your Null and Alternative hypotheses backwards.

I agree within a defined framework one can be 100% but only relative to the defined conditions, e.g. your 'given sample size'.
Because it is merely relatively 100%, it cannot be absolutely certain at 100%.

I am 100% certain that humans DON'T live to 150.

That's a falsifiable claim. When you produce an example of a living human older than 150 then I'll adjust (lower) my certainty.

Strong opinions, weakly held

The original point was the question of mortality;

mortality = the state of being subject to death.

In the future, with knowledge and technology, humans could be kept alive, i.e. not dead, for as long as possible.
That 'possibility' cracks the 100% certainty of mortality.

[Skepdick]

The original point was the question of mortality;

mortality = the state of being subject to death.

In the future, with knowledge and technology, humans could be kept alive, i.e. not dead, for as long as possible.
That 'possibility' cracks the 100% certainty of mortality.

Yes. COULD being the operative word, which is inherently uncertain!

In the future, if humans begin living past 150, I will revise my certainty figure.
In the present, I am 100% certain that humans don't live to the age of 150.

[Skepdick]

In the future, with knowledge and technology, humans could be kept alive, i.e. not dead, for as long as possible.
That 'possibility' cracks the 100% certainty of mortality.

What you are missing in your mental toolbox is the notion of a confidence interval/forecasting.

How certain are you that 5 years from now humans will live to the age of 150?
What about 10 years from now?
50 years from now?
500 years?
5000 years?

Obviously you will assign higher certainty to "5000 years from now" than "5 years from now".
Obviously you will not assign 100% certainty to either.

[Sculptor]

There are various meanings of what is an existential crisis.
Here is an argument to justify the substance of the existential crisis pulsating from an algorithm with the brain/mind of a person;

• 1. All humans are "programmed" [no God involved] to survive at all costs.

False. I think the evidence of millions of Jews in WW2 would disagree

I have missed out some details in this case which I had covered elsewhere.

In general, human will strive to survive "at all costs" [need qualification] at least until the inevitable or face a situation of hopelessness as in the case of the Jews in WW2 and in other cases.

There are numerous cases throughout the world and throughout history that are exceptions to you "ALL HUMANS". This tendency to exaggerate is indicative of your failure to understand the simple difference between "Subjective" and "objective" that I have encountered in many other of your posts in this forum.
Exaggeration is a poor argumentation strategy. It just makes your argument fallacious and makes you look stupid.

Note the case of Stockholm Syndrome where prisoners will turned to favor their captors, i.e. to survive at all costs, else they will be killed if they resist.

Normally some will throw in counter like - what about suicide? That is an exception because that is a mental problem recognized by psychiatric.
There are various exceptions, but my P1 is very general.

2. To ensure survival, any awareness of a threat of death is triggered with terrible fears to ensure the individual find solutions to avoid premature death.

See above.

See the above re exceptions.

3. All humans are "programmed" with self-awareness.

4. Mortality [death] is a "certainty" [99.999999..999%].

5. Self-awareness [3] make one aware of mortality [death] [4].

6. Premise 5 triggers 2 but there is no possibility of solutions [2].

7. No possibility of a direct solution [6] pose a dilemma - a cognitive dissonance - which cannot be resolved, thus the existential crisis exuding subliminally.
[/list]

The above cognitive dissonance from the inherent existential crisis drives the majority into the theism and religions which provide instant relief to numb the terrible existential pains [Angst, anxieties, despair, hopelessness, etc.] of the sufferer.

The above existential crisis also drives many other psychological problems for humans, but that is another topic.

Views?

Many people are quite happy to come to terms with death. Why not you too?

As I had stated in the above post, in general, ALL humans are programmed not to fear death consciously at all times. If they do so, they are suffering from a mental problem - Thanatophobia.

The algorithm from the combination of 1-7 is an inherent and intrinsic to humans which pulses subliminally deep in the primal brain which humans cannot rationalize away by direct means. It is SO EVIDENT, the majority of humans 90% have resorted to the irrational belief God exists or cling to other religious beliefs to soothe the subliminal existential crisis.

Yes, there are many who can rationalize with death. They rely on very flimsy rational neural inhibitors [which are evolved relatively recently] to inhibit the primal pulses of the subliminal existential crisis. But these inhibitors can weaken under various conditions, e.g. stress, brain damage, atrophy with old age as in the point below:

Across the world, people have varying levels of belief (and disbelief) in God, with some nations being more devout than others. But new research reveals one constant across parts of the globe: As people age, their belief in God seems to increase.
https://www.livescience.com/19971-belie ... m-age.html

Don't be too arrogant and confident you can deal with the fact of death within the subliminal impulses [not conscious] from the existential crisis [factors 1-7] above.
Note the case of Anthony Flew, the once world most famous atheist whose rational inhibitors gave way and he was driven to belief in a God [deism] during the later part of his life.

[Veritas Aequitas]

False. I think the evidence of millions of Jews in WW2 would disagree

I have missed out some details in this case which I had covered elsewhere.

In general, human will strive to survive "at all costs" [need qualification] at least until the inevitable or face a situation of hopelessness as in the case of the Jews in WW2 and in other cases.

There are numerous cases throughout the world and throughout history that are exceptions to you "ALL HUMANS". This tendency to exaggerate is indicative of your failure to understand the simple difference between "Subjective" and "objective" that I have encountered in many other of your posts in this forum.
Exaggeration is a poor argumentation strategy. It just makes your argument fallacious and makes you look stupid.

Nah you are the one who is ignorant and stupid.

I wonder you really understand the Principles of Normal Distribution?
If 5% on both side of the Normal Distribution are extreme and 'abnormal' that is 10% of all humans i.e. 700,000,000.
Thus we can still tolerate exception of 700 million and yet the 6.3 billion are still regards as representing "what is normal" of human nature.
You gave an example of 6 million Jews but note many of the Jews were striving to survive at all costs via resorting to various strategies until they have no alternatives.

We have argued about risk takers who risk their lives but how many % of humans are risk takers who are reckless. If 1% that is 70 millions of them which will not dent what is applicable to the majority representing human nature.

The point is, from observations and inference ALL humans has the fundamental "program" within the DNA to survive at all costs, but due to various conditions there are variations from this generic standards due to epigenetic and other factors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics

[Dontaskme]

Suggest you just stop going off tangent with my posts with your stupid ideas.

Your the one that is making ideas stupid, believing that there are entities such as jihads to be a possibilty, while denying entities such as God an impossiblity. It seems you do not understand the knower of all known concepts. That's why I'm here to blindside you into some proper understanding.

But it seems you prefer only to see one side of the coin completely ignoring the other, without realising there is no such thing as a one sided coin.

So keep on making ideas stupid, I know you don't like indulging in stupids, but it seems you just can't help yourself.

I'm just here to straighten out the crooked. Everything will make much more sense when the stupids are unbent out of their crooked shape.

.

[Dontaskme]

Such knowledge will lead to wisdom to understand why the Jihadist will want to rape and murder you as a religious duty upon the command of his God [illusory] which he believed as driven by the existential crisis above.

Suggest you just stop going off tangent with my posts with your stupid ideas.

Oh boy, you really are as dumb as rocks...when it comes to understanding the nature of the mind.


There is no wisdom in believing there is a Jihad inside of ''Consciousness being'' that is your only REAL direct experience EVER

That is where your stupid really starts to stand out so proud and bold that it gets in the way of real wisdom.

You've bought into the same LIE that the Jihads have bought into believing that God is something that the Jihads possess when they claim God is ''MY God'' and that ''My God'' has informed me to carry out acts of evil.

No, man, you are just getting yourself all caught up in the same (illusory) impossibilties here as your own self confessed beloved believed story about the (illusory) existance of a ''Jihad'' ...it's the same illusion as is the idea of the impossibilty of God.

You then proceed to make up other illusory concepts as an ''Existential Crisis'' that does not exist in reality, never has done, and never will do, except in your own made up mind of concepts, you are making up characters that do not exist except as conceptually known impossible possibles.

You've invented this idea known as an Existential Crisis..and for what? ... You do not even know to whom this Existential Crisis concept arises TO...except what your mind makes up, which is basically nothing, just like your God idea..

It's ok, we're all a little stupid here.





.

[Sculptor]

I have missed out some details in this case which I had covered elsewhere.

In general, human will strive to survive "at all costs" [need qualification] at least until the inevitable or face a situation of hopelessness as in the case of the Jews in WW2 and in other cases.

There are numerous cases throughout the world and throughout history that are exceptions to you "ALL HUMANS". This tendency to exaggerate is indicative of your failure to understand the simple difference between "Subjective" and "objective" that I have encountered in many other of your posts in this forum.
Exaggeration is a poor argumentation strategy. It just makes your argument fallacious and makes you look stupid.

Nah you are the one who is ignorant and stupid.

That is rich coming from a person that does not know the meaning of "ALL".
Please go forth and acquire a life!!