The meaning of life

[bobmax]

Well considering the Fact that you ARE lost 'now', in the days when this is being written, does this then MEAN that 'life' does have a clear reason?

I'm not lost just because there is no clear reason for life.

Well WHY THEN are you lost?

If there were, I would be dominated by this reason.

Which you are, you have just not yet evolved, matured, nor grown up enough to recognize and SEE this reason.

To the point of not being able to really exist. I would therefore be permanently lost.

This is another one of those prime examples of when those people would say just about ANY thing when 'trying to' back up and support their already HELD ONTO BELIEFS.

Instead the Truth hides, by hiding it allows me to exist.

Is this a NON-HIDDEN Truth?

Or just some thing you are saying and believing, in order to make your ALREADY HELD ONTO BELIEFS work in some way or another?

But if 'this' is a HIDDEN Truth, then HOW and WHY do you, supposedly, KNOW 'it'?

I don't know the Truth, because I am the Truth.

This statement itself does not come from a knowledge.

Because you only know what you are not.

Therefore I do not know myself, I simply am.
That is, I am the Truth.

[Age]

I'm not lost just because there is no clear reason for life.

Well WHY THEN are you lost?

If there were, I would be dominated by this reason.

Which you are, you have just not yet evolved, matured, nor grown up enough to recognize and SEE this reason.

To the point of not being able to really exist. I would therefore be permanently lost.

This is another one of those prime examples of when those people would say just about ANY thing when 'trying to' back up and support their already HELD ONTO BELIEFS.

Instead the Truth hides, by hiding it allows me to exist.

Is this a NON-HIDDEN Truth?

Or just some thing you are saying and believing, in order to make your ALREADY HELD ONTO BELIEFS work in some way or another?

But if 'this' is a HIDDEN Truth, then HOW and WHY do you, supposedly, KNOW 'it'?

I don't know the Truth, because I am the Truth.

So, to 'you', "bobmax", the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?' is 'the Truth', right?

Or, maybe 'you' are saying and suggesting here that 'you' do NOT YET KNOW thy Self, as 'you', obviously, did just SAY and CLAIM that 'you' do NOT know 'the Truth', and, if 'I' am 'the Truth', as 'you' SAY and CLAIM here, then 'you' STILL do NOT YET know who NOR what 'I' AM, EXACTLY.

This statement itself does not come from a knowledge.

No it does NOT. So, 'you' are Right here.

That statement, of YOURS, comes from CONTRADICTION and/or ABSURDITY.

Because you only know what you are not.

But this statement is, ALSO, OBVIOUSLY False, Wrong, AND Incorrect. As, unlike 'you', 'I' ACTUALLY DO KNOW, EXACTLY, who AND what 'I' AM.

Therefore I do not know myself, I simply am.
That is, I am the Truth.

BUT, if this what you 'know', AND 'you' ONLY know what 'you' are NOT, then, OBVIOUSLY, 'you' are NOT 'the Truth', correct?

[Age]

For Harbal.
Our existence is due to our parents.

AND, WHO and/or WHAT is due to the first 'parents' existence?

If you do noy like life, blame them for having put you here.

Only a very IMMATURE or UNEVOLVED 'adult' would 'blame' some 'thing' else for 'where' they are NOW.

Also, I do NOT think "harbal" is not liking 'Life', Itself, here. Although, and like most adults, AT TIMES, "harbal" does NOT find 'Life' that 'likeable'.

Have you got any children?

So, at 'your' age "ferdi" do 'you' STILL 'blame' 'your' parents for 'where' 'you' are RIGHT NOW?

[bobmax]

So, to 'you', "bobmax", the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?' is 'the Truth', right?

Is it possible to answer "Am I the falsehood?"

Can you be the fake?

Beware, not knowing falsehood, but BEING falsehood.
Is it possible?

[Harbal]

For Harbal.
Our existence is due to our parents. If you do noy like life, blame them for having put you here.

Why do you think I don't like life?

Have you got any children?

There are two children who, to the best of my knowledge, are mine, yes.

[promethean75]

I hate deep philosophical questions like this cuz I don't know how to answer them. What do u mean 'the meaning of life'? It doesn't mean anything, just like the world that exists now, existed before, and will continue existing - and the universe in which it exists that is doing the same - meant nothing before, means nothing now and will mean nothing in the future.

Existential meaning and logical/linguistic meaning are two different things tho. Statements mean things, not events, not affairs, not objects, etc. Meaning is either descriptive or tautological or metaphorical (which is really just descriptive) and refers to the cognitive content of a thought. A 'proposition with a sense' as your boy W put it.

But when someone akses 'what's the meaning of life', 'life' isn't a statement, so means nothing in the question. If they mean 'what is life made of' or 'what is life for', these are real questions, and neither have anything to do with what life 'means', whatever that means.

[Iwannaplato]

So, to 'you', "bobmax", the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?' is 'the Truth', right?

Is it possible to answer "Am I the falsehood?"

Can you be the fake?

Beware, not knowing falsehood, but BEING falsehood.
Is it possible?

And is the answer universal?
Can some know and others not?
Come some evaluate themselves well and others cannot do this?
Is there skill or natural talent involved? Can one get better at this?
Do some have qualities that make it hard for them to get better or a lack of interest?

Now that seemed to presume the answer and I am guessing not the answer you have.
I don't think someone can be completely falsehood.
They are, so, well, that's the way it is.
But can they deny to themselves and others what they are and this is a fundamental aspect of their being? Yes.

[bobmax]

So, to 'you', "bobmax", the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?' is 'the Truth', right?

Is it possible to answer "Am I the falsehood?"

Can you be the fake?

Beware, not knowing falsehood, but BEING falsehood.
Is it possible?

And is the answer universal?
Can some know and others not?
Come some evaluate themselves well and others cannot do this?
Is there skill or natural talent involved? Can one get better at this?
Do some have qualities that make it hard for them to get better or a lack of interest?

Now that seemed to presume the answer and I am guessing not the answer you have.
I don't think someone can be completely falsehood.
They are, so, well, that's the way it is.
But can they deny to themselves and others what they are and this is a fundamental aspect of their being? Yes.

Falsehood has no substance of its own.
Because the only reality is the Truth.

Falsehood exists as a manifestation of the Truth.
Every falsehood is therefore true.

Any falsehood of mine is possible only because it is founded on my being Truth.
Being = Truth

Denying what I am is also an expression of my being.

[Harbal]

I hate deep philosophical questions like this cuz I don't know how to answer them. What do u mean 'the meaning of life'?

"The Meaning of Life" is just a common phrase that came readily to mind when I needed a thread title. I'm not asking a question, so that might be why you are having trouble with an answer.

But when someone akses 'what's the meaning of life', 'life' isn't a statement, so means nothing in the question.

I completely agree with you, so I would never ask that question.

[Age]

So, to 'you', "bobmax", the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?' is 'the Truth', right?

Is it possible to answer "Am I the falsehood?"

Yes, but it would be a Truly ABSURD answer like some of the ones given in Life.

Can you be the fake?

'you', adult human beings, are being FAKE a great percentage of the time.

Beware, not knowing falsehood, but BEING falsehood.
Is it possible?

I asked you a question here, which you QUOTED above and are responding to here, BUT, you are NOT answering the ACTUAL QUESTION asked and posed, to you.

To 'you', "bobmax", is the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?' is 'the Truth'?

If no, then what is THE ANSWER to that question?

But if yes, then okay.

[Iwannaplato]

But when someone akses 'what's the meaning of life', 'life' isn't a statement, so means nothing in the question. If they mean 'what is life made of' or 'what is life for', these are real questions, and neither have anything to do with what life 'means', whatever that means.

I don't think most people are using 'meaning' in the same sense as one uses it in relation to statements. I think they mean things like 'What is the purpose?' and/or 'What's the point?' And other similar questions which one can ask about events, processes and things.

There's a kind of broad metaphorical similarity to the meaning of sentences, but I don't think it's the same.

[Iwannaplato]

Falsehood has no substance of its own.

Sure, it needs something to deny/misrepresent.

Because the only reality is the Truth.

I don't think that makes sense. Things are not assertions, except those that are assertions. A cow is not true, it's real.
And this not making sense then leads to this....

Falsehood exists as a manifestation of the Truth.
Every falsehood is therefore true.

Every falsehood is real (those that are real). Some possible falsehoods have never been asserted. Some things have not been covered up or denied.

Any falsehood of mine is possible only because it is founded on my being Truth.

And I would change that last word to real.

Being = Truth

Not to me.

Denying what I am is also an expression of my being.

Not just. It's a denial of the expression of other parts of your being. It's real, but false.

[Harbal]

'you', adult human beings, are being FAKE a great percentage of the time.

You quite often point out the faults and flaws of adult human beings, and while I often agree with you, I don't think it's fair or appropriate to be so critical of them for it, even though you might think it would be better if they were different. If you observe the nature and behaviour of human beings, then isn't whatever impression you are left with just that of what a human being is? I often think it is such a shame about hedgehogs; they could be so much better, so much more, but if it is in their nature to mess up the road by placing themselves in the path of oncoming traffic, rather that just sticking to delighting me with their presence in my garden, there seems little point in lecturing them about it.

[Age]

'you', adult human beings, are being FAKE a great percentage of the time.

You quite often point out the faults and flaws of adult human beings, and while I often agree with you, I don't think it's fair or appropriate to be so critical of them for it, even though you might think it would be better if they were different.

But WHEN have I EVER been 'critical'. I just put words in front of 'you', human beings. Now, either those words are True or False, or partly true, Right or Wrong, or partly right, or Correct or Incorrect, or partly correct. And, if ANY one sees them being 'critical' or 'so critical' is because of and due SOLELY because of that one's OWN views or judgement calls.

Me just saying and claiming, in words, that 'you', adult human beings, are being FAKE a great percentage of the time NEVER provides ANY 'judgement call' of being 'critical' NOR of being 'so critical'. I am JUST expressing what I OBSERVE, which is EITHER Right or Wrong, or partly wrong, which if MY WORDS are Wrong or partly wrong, then just SAY which ones, and then just EXPLAIN the reason/s WHY.

Also, does ANY one think that it would be 'worse' if adult human beings were being LESS FAKE?

If yes, then WHO, and WHY?

If you observe the nature and behaviour of human beings, then isn't whatever impression you are left with just that of what a human being is?

If the impression is Correct, then yes.

And, when just expressing this 'impression' this does NOT necessarily mean ANY 'judgement' is being made. Although, and obviously, the 'reader', "them" 'self', may make a 'judgement', or may even ASSUME some 'judgement' was being made by the 'writer' or the one expressing the impression, as you have above.

I often think it is such a shame about hedgehogs; they could be so much better, so much more, but if it is in their nature to mess up the road by placing themselves in the path of oncoming traffic, rather that just sticking to delighting me with their presence in my garden, there seems little point in lecturing them about it.

Is this because hedgehogs do NOT have the ABILITY to COMPREHEND and UNDERSTAND 'lectures', or for some other reason?

And, is it, REALLY, in hedgehog's 'nature' to so-call 'mess up the road', by 'placing themselves in the path of oncoming traffic'? Or, is just a part of Nature, Itself, that another species of animal evolved so much faster or quicker that they began to imagine, design, and create roads, automobiles, and traffic BEFORE the hedgehogs could evolve ways to AVOID the 'oncoming traffic'?

Now, would you like to SHOW A time WHERE I have, while just POINTING OUT the FAULTS and FLAWS with 'you', adult human beings, I have ALSO been 'critical', or 'so critical', of those FAULTS or FLAWS? I CERTAINLY can NOT SEE ANY in the example above here. BUT, maybe 'you', or "others", can SEE what I have YET TO.

[bobmax]

Denying what I am is also an expression of my being.

Not just. It's a denial of the expression of other parts of your being. It's real, but false.

I am not a whole of parts.

Can you really think you are a composition of distinct parts?
Where parts of you deny the truth of other parts of yourself?

What you truly are is one!
Otherwise you simply wouldn't be.

Reality cannot be false, because falsehood is non-being.
While reality is being.
Reality is true by definition.

You try to think of something real that is in itself false...
It's impossible!