The meaning of life

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Age »

Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 11:17 am
Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 10:14 am

Okay, can I now ask, then why not just say 'consciousness' if this is what you actually mean, when you use the 'mind' word?

Because 'you', human beings, ACTUALLY MEAN so MANY DIFFERENT 'things' when 'you' use the 'mind' word it can be somewhat difficult to keep a track of what 'you', ALL, individually, are ACTUALLY MEANING.
Because I don't think of the mind as being just consciousness. We human beings can mean many different things when we use a good many words. That is just the nature of language and how we human beings conceptualise things.
Okay, so what did you ACTUALLY MEAN when you said and wrote; that consciousness is what I refer to when I use the word "mind".

If you do NOT think of the 'mind' as being 'just consciousness', then WHY say and write that 'consciousness' is what you refer to when you use the word 'mind'.

If, to you, you think the 'mind' is more than 'just consciousness', then what else, or what more, are you talking about and referring to here?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 11:17 am
Also, WHY do you usually NOT state 'irrefutable facts'?

WHAT do you usually state, INSTEAD?
I might state something as a fact if I firmly believe it to be the case, but I am always aware of the possibility of being mistaken.
WHY do SO MANY of 'you', adult human beings, in the days when this is being written anyway, BELIEVE 'things' to be true, but ACTUALLY at the SAME TIME still ACCEPT those 'things' to NOT be true AT ALL.

I wonder WHY you BELIEVE 'things' to be true when those 'things' in fact might NOT even be true AT ALL?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 11:17 am
Age wrote:
Harbal wrote: It seems to me that modern living is not fully compatible with the human psychology that developed in different circumstances.
So, WHY are 'you', human beings, CREATING such an 'environment' for "yourselves"?

OBVIOUSLY, there is CLEARLY absolutely NO OTHER 'thing' making and creating 'that environment', which you are speaking of here.
All animals have instinctual drives that direct their behaviour.
Ah so you do ACTUALLY think, or BELIEVE, that there is an INTERNAL INSTINCTUAL DRIVE, or DRIVER, which DIRECTS your BEHAVIOR, right?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 11:17 am The drive to eat, or to procreate, for example. Human beings seem to have a drive to "progress" socially and technologically. As I don't believe that natural selection can see into the future, it is not hard form me to envisage that progression arriving at a point where it could conflict with other elements of our human nature.
Well then OBVIOUSLY 'it' was NOT so-called 'progress' AT ALL.

The word 'progress' does entail some sort of 'moving forward', in regards to some sort of 'good' or 'right', correct?

And, 'moving forward' does imply some sort of 'end result' or 'designed outcome', right?
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9565
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Harbal »

Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 10:42 am
SO, you REACH 'CONCLUSIONS' HOLD 'them' as being true, right, and/or correct ONLY UNTIL so-called 'new evidence or information' comes along YOUR WAY, and then, and ONLY THEN, you will ASSESS the NEW EVIDENCE or INFORMATION, and their IMPLICATIONS, with what you are ALREADY HOLDING, or CONCLUDING, as being true, right, and/or correct, correct?
Sometimes the conclusions I reach, or the judgements I make, turn out to be incorrect; either partially or wholly. When this happens, and I become aware of it, I will normally have a rethink.
AND, depending on how so-called 'COMPELLING the evidence was', you, MIGHT, even revise your OLD, HELD ONTO 'CONCLUSION', right?
Yes.
Just out of CURIOSITY, if and when you BELIEVE, for example that God does NOT exist, then HOW, EXACTLY, could ANY so-called 'new evidence or information' ACTUALLY COME ALONG or COME YOUR WAY?
Things that we were previously unaware of can come to out attention in any number of ways. Maybe if God sent an angel to have a word with me, I might begin to take the possibility of his existence more seriously.
If, for example, one has ALREADY 'CONCLUDED' that some 'thing' DOES NOT exist AND COULD NOT exist, then HOW could ANY 'new evidence or new information' POSSIBLY come-to-light?
While I do sometimes decline to accept that something exists, I don't often conclude that it could not exist. Even so, if one did conclude that something could not possibly exist, I don't see any reason why evidence that proved it did exist could not subsequently come to light.
If some one has ALREADY CONCLUDED and BELIEVES that some 'thing' COULD NOT exist, then there could NEVER, and FOREVER MORE, be ANY 'NEW INFORMATION' AT ALL that could EVENTUATE, to them.
Why not? What is there to prevent it?
Also, and by the way, the way 'you' OPERATE above here, to me, seems a VERY CUMBERSOME and VERY SLOW way of LEARNING and SEEING/UNDERSTANDING here.
SEE, REALLY it is VERY SIMPLE and EASY to ASCERTAIN Truth, from Falsehoods, Right, from Wrong, and what IS Correct, from what IS NOT Correct. That is; ONCE one LEARNS and KNOWS H.O.W.

For EVERY 'problem' there IS A 'solution', and, for EVERY 'solution', there IS A 'formula'.

And, the formula that WILL and DOES solve ALL Truly MEANINGFUL problems in Life IS H.O.W.

Once one LEARNS HOW to answer, or solve, ALL of Life's REAL 'problems', then 'this', itself, IS, literally, the RE-SOLUTION, which HAS BEEN and IS WITHIN ALL of 'us', ALREADY.

Just being PATIENT while A 'species' evolved ENOUGH to LEARN HOW to RECOGNIZE, FIND, and SEE 'the answers', which have ALWAYS BEEN HERE, BEFORE 'us' ALL of the time, has just been the HARDEST PART. 'Patience' WAS, and STILL IS, A VIRTUE, for those of 'you' who are STILL, WAITING.
Furthermore I MUCH PREFER to LOOK AT 'proof' ONLY INSTEAD of ANY supposed 'evidence', that way I am ONLY LOOKING AT and SEEING what IS IRREFUTABLY True.
Sometimes, what seems irrefutable today, ends up being refuted tomorrow. I suppose I just don't believe* in irrefutable truths in the way you do.

*I expect you to object to the word, "believe", but I am going to stick with it.
Age wrote:
Harbal wrote: I have reached a conclusion about what is likely to be the truth of things.
But which could be FULLY or PARTLY False, Wrong, and/or Incorrect, correct?
Yes, that is correct.
If yes, then this would MEAN that ALL of what you have 'CONCLUDED' could potentially be PARTLY False, Wrong, and/or Incorrect or FULLY False, Wrong, and Incorrect. Which, to me, would make the point of 'CONCLUDING' 'things' are Truly VERY WASTEFUL time of energy and resources. Especially considering the Fact that thee ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth of 'things' can be SEEN, UNDERSTOOD, LOOKED AT and DISCUSSED, INSTEAD.
I might take the same view as you if human beings were infallible logic machines, but they are not.
Age wrote:
Harbal wrote: If I only acted upon what I know to be irrefutably true, I would hardly do much at all.
What do you MEAN here?

What are you thinking or MEANING that you WOULD DO, and, WOULD NOT DO?
If my doorbell rings, I cannot be sure that there will not be a man with a gun standing at the other side of it with the intention of shooting me dead. Perhaps I have been watching a film where that very thing has happened, and the event has come into my mind upon hearing the sound of the doorbell. Even so, I would still normally open my door regardless of the absence of irrefutible proof that it wasn't just the postman. I know it might seem a reckless risk to take in order to save myself a trip to the sorting office to pick up the parcel that the postman was unable to deliver, but that's just the way I live my life.
SEE, REALLY it is VERY SIMPLE and EASY to ASCERTAIN Truth, from Falsehoods, Right, from Wrong, and what IS Correct, from what IS NOT Correct. That is; ONCE one LEARNS and KNOWS H.O.W.

For EVERY 'problem' there IS A 'solution', and, for EVERY 'solution', there IS A 'formula'.

And, the formula that WILL and DOES solve ALL Truly MEANINGFUL problems in Life IS H.O.W.

Once one LEARNS HOW to answer, or solve, ALL of Life's REAL 'problems', then 'this', itself, IS, literally, the RE-SOLUTION, which HAS BEEN and IS WITHIN ALL of 'us', ALREADY.

Just being PATIENT while A 'species' evolved ENOUGH to LEARN HOW to RECOGNIZE, FIND, and SEE 'the answers', which have ALWAYS BEEN HERE, BEFORE 'us' ALL of the time, has just been the HARDEST PART. 'Patience' WAS, and STILL IS, A VIRTUE, for those of 'you' who are STILL, WAITING.
But this doesn't have the importance to me that it seems to have to you. I think there will always be things that I can never know for sure, and I can accept that.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9565
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Harbal »

Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 11:29 am Those who are labelled and named "alcoholics" are 'that way' BECAUSE of some PREVIOUS 'state of misery', in childhood.
Yes, that's what some sort of councillor said to my wife.
Which, it WILL BE FOUND, MEANS that WHEN ALL adult human beings LEARN HOW to LIVE PERFECTLY HAPPILY, AND are DOING SO, which, by the way, is FAR SIMPLER and FAR EASIER then FIRST ENVISIONED, in the days when this is being written, then NO child lives in ANY 'state of misery', then ALL the ADDICTIONS, like above, which people 'grow up' WITH end up VANISHING, COMPLETELY.
I'm afraid I consider that to be naive nonsense, but I invite you to show why it is irrefutible truth.
Also, could it be POSSIBLE that 'your partner' could BLAME becoming 'an alcoholic' BECAUSE of 'the partner' that they were married to?
My partner did blame me for her alcohol problem, although she only seemed to regard it a problem in as much as I would not accept her drinking. But, yes, she blamed me as being the cause of her drinking. I accept that she had cause for complaint, but I don't know how responsible I am for her choosing alcohol as a way of dealing with it.
Or, was the WHOLE CAUSE and BLAME of the 'state of misery' ON BOTH of 'you' SOLELY BECAUSE of 'your partner's' LOVE OF, or ADDICTION TO, alcoholic beverages?
No, not solely.
Are you suggesting here that there was ABSOLUTELY NO 'thing' AT ALL, in Life, that you could have done to HELP 'that situation'?
I am saying that I could not find a way of improving the situation.
Age wrote:
Harbal wrote: Just switch on the news if you want more examples of it. I'm not an expert on mental illness, so I might be sticking my neck out when I say it is not possible to live happily with clinical depression, or severe schizophrenia.
WHEN you COME TO LEARN and UNDERSTAND HOW and WHY these 'things' CAME INTO Existence, then you WILL BE CLOSER to SEEING and UNDERSTANDING HOW to PREVENT such 'things', and HOW TO LIVE PERFECTLY HAPPILY, FOREVER MORE.
Unless you provide justification for making that assertion, I have to regard it as meaningless.
And, to you, is there ONE WAY for EVERY one, or, MANY DIFFERENT WAYS for the MANY DIFFERENT people that exist?

To me, there is A WAY, and this ONE WAY, is RESOLVED by REMOVING the DISTORTED THINKING that there ARE DIFFERENT WAYS of 'living', which DIFFERENT people 'NEED', in order to just BE HAPPY.

BUT, I am STILL SOME WAY YET of being ABLE TO express and share 'this way' FULLY, CONCISELY, PRECISELY, and PROPERLY.
Then would it not be better to say nothing until you are able to "share 'this way' FULLY, CONCISELY, PRECISELY, and PROPERLY."
Age wrote:
Harbal wrote: so if you don't want to regard this as evidence of anything, we can discount it.
WOW that was a Truly WEIRD 'thing' to just COME UP WITH and ASSUME here. Well to me anyway.
Well I suppose it is something you just have to put up with if you insist on involving yourself with human beings.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9565
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Harbal »

Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:14 pm Okay, so what did you ACTUALLY MEAN when you said and wrote; that consciousness is what I refer to when I use the word "mind".

If you do NOT think of the 'mind' as being 'just consciousness', then WHY say and write that 'consciousness' is what you refer to when you use the word 'mind'.

If, to you, you think the 'mind' is more than 'just consciousness', then what else, or what more, are you talking about and referring to here?
I don't feel able to give you a satisfactory deinition of what the mind is, so I won't try to answer this question.
WHY do SO MANY of 'you', adult human beings, in the days when this is being written anyway, BELIEVE 'things' to be true, but ACTUALLY at the SAME TIME still ACCEPT those 'things' to NOT be true AT ALL.

I wonder WHY you BELIEVE 'things' to be true when those 'things' in fact might NOT even be true AT ALL?
Because that is the nature of human beings, I suppose. :?
Ah so you do ACTUALLY think, or BELIEVE, that there is an INTERNAL INSTINCTUAL DRIVE, or DRIVER, which DIRECTS your BEHAVIOR, right?
There is probably a better way of putting it, but yes, to some extent.
The word 'progress' does entail some sort of 'moving forward', in regards to some sort of 'good' or 'right', correct?

And, 'moving forward' does imply some sort of 'end result' or 'designed outcome', right?
It does imply some sort of intended outcome. The source of the intention being the imagination of those striving to progress.
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Age »

Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 pm
Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 10:42 am
SO, you REACH 'CONCLUSIONS' HOLD 'them' as being true, right, and/or correct ONLY UNTIL so-called 'new evidence or information' comes along YOUR WAY, and then, and ONLY THEN, you will ASSESS the NEW EVIDENCE or INFORMATION, and their IMPLICATIONS, with what you are ALREADY HOLDING, or CONCLUDING, as being true, right, and/or correct, correct?
Sometimes the conclusions I reach, or the judgements I make, turn out to be incorrect; either partially or wholly. When this happens, and I become aware of it, I will normally have a rethink.
Okay.

Do you LIKE to be INFORMED when YOUR CONCLUSIONS, and/or JUDGMENTS, are Incorrect, partially and/or wholly?

Or, in other words, if what you BELIEVE was true was NOT true, then would you like to HEAR 'it'?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 pm
AND, depending on how so-called 'COMPELLING the evidence was', you, MIGHT, even revise your OLD, HELD ONTO 'CONCLUSION', right?
Yes.
Just out of CURIOSITY, if and when you BELIEVE, for example that God does NOT exist, then HOW, EXACTLY, could ANY so-called 'new evidence or information' ACTUALLY COME ALONG or COME YOUR WAY?
Things that we were previously unaware of can come to out attention in any number of ways. Maybe if God sent an angel to have a word with me, I might begin to take the possibility of his existence more seriously.
LOL BUT HOW could A 'thing' which you BELIEVE could NOT even exist send an angel to you, or do absolutely ANY thing?

Also, WHY have you CONCLUDED that God is a "he"?

Do you KNOW WHERE this DISTORTED CONCLUSION and BELIEF even came from, EXACTLY?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 pm
If, for example, one has ALREADY 'CONCLUDED' that some 'thing' DOES NOT exist AND COULD NOT exist, then HOW could ANY 'new evidence or new information' POSSIBLY come-to-light?
While I do sometimes decline to accept that something exists, I don't often conclude that it could not exist. Even so, if one did conclude that something could not possibly exist, I don't see any reason why evidence that proved it did exist could not subsequently come to light.
WHY do you NOT appear to be ABLE TO COMPREHEND that WHILE one is BELIEVING or DISBELIEVING some 'thing' is true, then there is absolutely NOTHING that could 'come-to-light' and SHOW OTHERWISE?

Maybe if you provide AN EXAMPLE of while you are BELIEVING, or DISBELIEVING, some 'thing' is true, HOW EXACTLY CONTRARY 'evidence' or 'proof' could be SHOWN or EXPLAINED, to you, then I COULD LEARN HOW to PROVIDE such 'evidence' AND 'proof' to 'you', human beings.
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 pm
If some one has ALREADY CONCLUDED and BELIEVES that some 'thing' COULD NOT exist, then there could NEVER, and FOREVER MORE, be ANY 'NEW INFORMATION' AT ALL that could EVENTUATE, to them.
Why not? What is there to prevent it?
BECAUSE it is AN IMPOSSIBILITY to BELIEVE, or DISBELIEVE, some 'thing' is true WHILE AT THE EXACT SAME TIME OPEN to 'it' NOT being true AT ALL NOR PARTIALLY.

If you think or BELIEVE otherwise, then PLEASE SHOW ME HOW.
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 pm
Also, and by the way, the way 'you' OPERATE above here, to me, seems a VERY CUMBERSOME and VERY SLOW way of LEARNING and SEEING/UNDERSTANDING here.
SEE, REALLY it is VERY SIMPLE and EASY to ASCERTAIN Truth, from Falsehoods, Right, from Wrong, and what IS Correct, from what IS NOT Correct. That is; ONCE one LEARNS and KNOWS H.O.W.

For EVERY 'problem' there IS A 'solution', and, for EVERY 'solution', there IS A 'formula'.

And, the formula that WILL and DOES solve ALL Truly MEANINGFUL problems in Life IS H.O.W.

Once one LEARNS HOW to answer, or solve, ALL of Life's REAL 'problems', then 'this', itself, IS, literally, the RE-SOLUTION, which HAS BEEN and IS WITHIN ALL of 'us', ALREADY.

Just being PATIENT while A 'species' evolved ENOUGH to LEARN HOW to RECOGNIZE, FIND, and SEE 'the answers', which have ALWAYS BEEN HERE, BEFORE 'us' ALL of the time, has just been the HARDEST PART. 'Patience' WAS, and STILL IS, A VIRTUE, for those of 'you' who are STILL, WAITING.
Furthermore I MUCH PREFER to LOOK AT 'proof' ONLY INSTEAD of ANY supposed 'evidence', that way I am ONLY LOOKING AT and SEEING what IS IRREFUTABLY True.
Sometimes, what seems irrefutable today, ends up being refuted tomorrow.
LOL
LOL
LOL

Well then 'it' was OBVIOUSLY NEVER EVER 'irrefutable'.

And, to think, assume, or BELIEVE that 'it' WAS, is AGAIN, just VERY DISTORTED and TWISTED thinking.

ONLY 'that', which can be and IS IRREFUTABLE is what IS ACTUALLY IRREFUTABLE. a
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 pm I suppose I just don't believe* in irrefutable truths in the way you do.
But i do NOT 'believe' in irrefutable truths in ANY way. So, what made you ASSUME, SAY, and WRITE the 'thing' that you just did here?

Also, in 'what' WAY were you ASSUMING I did 'believe' in irrefutable truths, EXACTLY?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 pm *I expect you to object to the word, "believe", but I am going to stick with it.
And you 'STICKING WITH it' is just ANOTHER SIGN, EXAMPLE, AND PROOF of one NOT be OPEN, AT ALL.

Unless you are now going to CLAIM that you are OPEN, to which I will ask you, What, EXACTLY, are you OPEN to here?'

Also, WHY would I so-call 'object' to just ANOTHER word used in the english language?

Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 pm
Age wrote:
Harbal wrote: I have reached a conclusion about what is likely to be the truth of things.
But which could be FULLY or PARTLY False, Wrong, and/or Incorrect, correct?
Yes, that is correct.
So, you ADMIT that you CONCLUDE 'things' to be true, right, or correct but which, in fact, may NOT be true, right, NOR correct AT ALL, right?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 pm
If yes, then this would MEAN that ALL of what you have 'CONCLUDED' could potentially be PARTLY False, Wrong, and/or Incorrect or FULLY False, Wrong, and Incorrect. Which, to me, would make the point of 'CONCLUDING' 'things' are Truly VERY WASTEFUL time of energy and resources. Especially considering the Fact that thee ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth of 'things' can be SEEN, UNDERSTOOD, LOOKED AT and DISCUSSED, INSTEAD.
I might take the same view as you if human beings were infallible logic machines, but they are not.
LOL but 'you', human beings, do NOT HAVE TO CONCLUDE 'things'.

SEE, what 'you' CAN DO INSTEAD is just REMAIN OPEN.

SIMPLE, REALLY.
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 pm
Age wrote:
Harbal wrote: If I only acted upon what I know to be irrefutably true, I would hardly do much at all.
What do you MEAN here?

What are you thinking or MEANING that you WOULD DO, and, WOULD NOT DO?
If my doorbell rings, I cannot be sure that there will not be a man with a gun standing at the other side of it with the intention of shooting me dead. Perhaps I have been watching a film where that very thing has happened, and the event has come into my mind upon hearing the sound of the doorbell.
This 'mind' 'thing', which you speak of, is that 'thing' that is part 'consciousness' but NOT ALL 'consciousness', correct?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 pm Even so, I would still normally open my door regardless of the absence of irrefutible proof that it wasn't just the postman. I know it might seem a reckless risk to take in order to save myself a trip to the sorting office to pick up the parcel that the postman was unable to deliver, but that's just the way I live my life.
But you do NOT BELIEVE in ANY irrefutable truths, correct?

If yes, then this implies that, to you, there are NO irrefutable truths AT ALL, right?

If yes, then this means that you will ALWAYS be doing some 'thing'?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 pm
SEE, REALLY it is VERY SIMPLE and EASY to ASCERTAIN Truth, from Falsehoods, Right, from Wrong, and what IS Correct, from what IS NOT Correct. That is; ONCE one LEARNS and KNOWS H.O.W.

For EVERY 'problem' there IS A 'solution', and, for EVERY 'solution', there IS A 'formula'.

And, the formula that WILL and DOES solve ALL Truly MEANINGFUL problems in Life IS H.O.W.

Once one LEARNS HOW to answer, or solve, ALL of Life's REAL 'problems', then 'this', itself, IS, literally, the RE-SOLUTION, which HAS BEEN and IS WITHIN ALL of 'us', ALREADY.

Just being PATIENT while A 'species' evolved ENOUGH to LEARN HOW to RECOGNIZE, FIND, and SEE 'the answers', which have ALWAYS BEEN HERE, BEFORE 'us' ALL of the time, has just been the HARDEST PART. 'Patience' WAS, and STILL IS, A VIRTUE, for those of 'you' who are STILL, WAITING.
But this doesn't have the importance to me that it seems to have to you.
Okay GREAT.

What does have 'the importance' to you here?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 pm I think there will always be things that I can never know for sure, and I can accept that.
Okay, like 'what', for example?

Also, are you under some sort of illusion that i could NOT or could NEVER accept 'that'?
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Dontaskme »

Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:02 pm If Life, SUPPOSEDLY, has ONLY 'got meaning' IF 'you' or 'I' place 'meaning' here, then could it be argued that if Life has got 'NO meaning', then is this ALSO because 'you' or 'I' have placed 'NO meaning' here?

Or, does 'this' only work ONE WAY?
It works both ways only insofar as there are two ways that one can know life at all. One way would be to place meaning upon it, and the second way would be to place no meaning upon it. But life has no requirements for either meaning or no meaning to be as it is.
Meaning or no meaning is surplus to life's requirements,simply because life is ultimately this ever present irrefutable unknowing, one without a second reality, in which words only appear from sound and are just tools used to build a narrative about it, words that will always be an overwrite upon what is ultimately unwritten, and unknowing, in other words, words are an imprint of what is ultimately without an image, as in consciousness, this unknown, made known as and through a mirror image.

Ultimately, sound which is just the vibration of pure ultimate silent unknowing stillness giving the illusory sense that life is known as it is written, as and through the word which is bascially just sound that is then translated as symbolic squiggly marks upon a blank surface put there by a pen, pencil or any solid material instrument that makes contact with the blank surface.
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Age »

Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:24 pm
Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 11:29 am Those who are labelled and named "alcoholics" are 'that way' BECAUSE of some PREVIOUS 'state of misery', in childhood.
Yes, that's what some sort of councillor said to my wife.
Well it is an IRREFUTABLE Fact.
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:24 pm
Which, it WILL BE FOUND, MEANS that WHEN ALL adult human beings LEARN HOW to LIVE PERFECTLY HAPPILY, AND are DOING SO, which, by the way, is FAR SIMPLER and FAR EASIER then FIRST ENVISIONED, in the days when this is being written, then NO child lives in ANY 'state of misery', then ALL the ADDICTIONS, like above, which people 'grow up' WITH end up VANISHING, COMPLETELY.
I'm afraid I consider that to be naive nonsense, but I invite you to show why it is irrefutible truth.
If you REALLY would like me to answer 'this' FULLY and CORRECTLY, then you will have to be FAR MORE SPECIFIC when ELABORATING on what the 'it' is here.
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:24 pm
Also, could it be POSSIBLE that 'your partner' could BLAME becoming 'an alcoholic' BECAUSE of 'the partner' that they were married to?
My partner did blame me for her alcohol problem, although she only seemed to regard it a problem in as much as I would not accept her drinking.
WHY would you NOT 'accept' "her" drinking? It was OBVIOUS that "she" was drinking right?

Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:24 pm But, yes, she blamed me as being the cause of her drinking. I accept that she had cause for complaint, but I don't know how responsible I am for her choosing alcohol as a way of dealing with it.
What is the 'it' word here in relation to, EXACTLY?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:24 pm
Or, was the WHOLE CAUSE and BLAME of the 'state of misery' ON BOTH of 'you' SOLELY BECAUSE of 'your partner's' LOVE OF, or ADDICTION TO, alcoholic beverages?
No, not solely.
Are you suggesting here that there was ABSOLUTELY NO 'thing' AT ALL, in Life, that you could have done to HELP 'that situation'?
I am saying that I could not find a way of improving the situation.
Do you here mean 'could not' or 'had not'?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:24 pm
Age wrote:
Harbal wrote: Just switch on the news if you want more examples of it. I'm not an expert on mental illness, so I might be sticking my neck out when I say it is not possible to live happily with clinical depression, or severe schizophrenia.
WHEN you COME TO LEARN and UNDERSTAND HOW and WHY these 'things' CAME INTO Existence, then you WILL BE CLOSER to SEEING and UNDERSTANDING HOW to PREVENT such 'things', and HOW TO LIVE PERFECTLY HAPPILY, FOREVER MORE.
Unless you provide justification for making that assertion, I have to regard it as meaningless.
Do 'you' HAVE TO, or, CHOOSE TO?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:24 pm
And, to you, is there ONE WAY for EVERY one, or, MANY DIFFERENT WAYS for the MANY DIFFERENT people that exist?

To me, there is A WAY, and this ONE WAY, is RESOLVED by REMOVING the DISTORTED THINKING that there ARE DIFFERENT WAYS of 'living', which DIFFERENT people 'NEED', in order to just BE HAPPY.

BUT, I am STILL SOME WAY YET of being ABLE TO express and share 'this way' FULLY, CONCISELY, PRECISELY, and PROPERLY.
Then would it not be better to say nothing until you are able to "share 'this way' FULLY, CONCISELY, PRECISELY, and PROPERLY."
Maybe I have NOT YET SHARED, with you, and EXPRESSED, to you, that I am here to LEARN HOW to communicate BETTER with 'you', human beings.

So, WHEN I have LEARNED HOW TO EXPRESS and COMMUNICATE BETTER, then I will GO and DO 'that'. The plan, by the way, was to NEVER do 'that' here, in this forum.
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:24 pm
Age wrote:
Harbal wrote: so if you don't want to regard this as evidence of anything, we can discount it.
WOW that was a Truly WEIRD 'thing' to just COME UP WITH and ASSUME here. Well to me anyway.
Well I suppose it is something you just have to put up with if you insist on involving yourself with human beings.
But NOT ALL human beings are like 'you', "harbal". That is NOT ALL would ASSUME and SAY such a thing as you did here. Unless, OF COURSE, you think or BELIEVE otherwise.
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Age »

Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:38 pm
Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:14 pm Okay, so what did you ACTUALLY MEAN when you said and wrote; that consciousness is what I refer to when I use the word "mind".

If you do NOT think of the 'mind' as being 'just consciousness', then WHY say and write that 'consciousness' is what you refer to when you use the word 'mind'.

If, to you, you think the 'mind' is more than 'just consciousness', then what else, or what more, are you talking about and referring to here?
I don't feel able to give you a satisfactory deinition of what the mind is, so I won't try to answer this question.
WHY do SO MANY of 'you', adult human beings, in the days when this is being written anyway, BELIEVE 'things' to be true, but ACTUALLY at the SAME TIME still ACCEPT those 'things' to NOT be true AT ALL.

I wonder WHY you BELIEVE 'things' to be true when those 'things' in fact might NOT even be true AT ALL?
Because that is the nature of human beings, I suppose. :?
So, if the so-called 'nature' of 'you', human beings, is to BELIEVE 'things' ARE true when they are NOT necessarily true AT ALL, then this helps in EXPLAINING WHY it is taking SO LONG for 'you', human beings, to come to SEE and REALIZE thee ACTUAL IRREFUTABLE Truth of 'things'.

Also, and by the way, that is NOT the 'nature of human beings' AT ALL, and this is PROVED IRREFUTABLY True by ALL of 'you'.
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:38 pm
Ah so you do ACTUALLY think, or BELIEVE, that there is an INTERNAL INSTINCTUAL DRIVE, or DRIVER, which DIRECTS your BEHAVIOR, right?
There is probably a better way of putting it, but yes, to some extent.
Great, will you help me in coming up with a better way of putting 'it'?
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:38 pm
The word 'progress' does entail some sort of 'moving forward', in regards to some sort of 'good' or 'right', correct?

And, 'moving forward' does imply some sort of 'end result' or 'designed outcome', right?
It does imply some sort of intended outcome.
I am very happy that you expressed this the way you did and chose the one that you did here.
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:38 pm The source of the intention being the imagination of those striving to progress.
But WHY 'imagination'?

Could it NOT be from the 'source' of thee One who IS the 'Driver', 'Guider', or 'Instinctual Knower' from DEEP WITHIN ALL of 'us'?
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Dontaskme »

Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 11:48 am
I am NOT SURE what you are 'trying to' ALLEGE here.

But anyway, CLAIMING that the earth 'formed' OVER 4.6 billion years ago, when, OBVIOUSLY, the earth is STILL 'forming' NOW, is a bit MISLEADING is it NOT?
Well, that would be your version then wouldn't it, that the earth is still forming now, and was not formed over 4.6 billion years ago.
Which incidently, I do not wish or have any intent to take away your assertion that the earth is still forming now, because it's your version of events that you are entitled to hold if that is your truth, and so who am I to refute what is your truth.
Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 11:48 amTo me, it would be a bit like saying the Universe WAS 'created' at the big bang, when OBVIOUSLY, SOME 'thing' PRIOR to the 'big bang' MADE or CREATED the so-called 'big bang', which would, OBVIOUSLY, HAVE TO BE A PART OF 'the Universe', and, the Universe is STILL IN 'creation' and so the Universe was NEVER 'created', BEFORE.

Unless, OF COURSE, we want to LOOK AT and TALK ABOUT the Fact that there is ONLY the HERE-NOW, WHERE EVERY 'thing' IS BEING CREATED, ALL AT ONCE, it could be argued.
OK then, lets return to the original question you posited, which was in regard to the thing being responsible for the earth ..to which I will answer... the SUN is responsible for the earth.
How does that answer swing with you Age?
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Age »

Dontaskme wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:54 pm
Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:02 pm If Life, SUPPOSEDLY, has ONLY 'got meaning' IF 'you' or 'I' place 'meaning' here, then could it be argued that if Life has got 'NO meaning', then is this ALSO because 'you' or 'I' have placed 'NO meaning' here?

Or, does 'this' only work ONE WAY?
It works both ways only insofar as there are two ways that one can know life at all. One way would be to place meaning upon it, and the second way would be to place no meaning upon it. But life has no requirements for either meaning or no meaning to be as it is.
But if 'you' are A PART OF Life, and 'you' are placing 'meaning' or 'NO meaning' on Life, then would those actions/behaviors NOT be A REQUIREMENT of Life, Itself?
Dontaskme wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:54 pm Meaning or no meaning is surplus to life's requirements,simply because life is ultimately this ever present irrefutable unknowing, one without a second reality, in which words only appear from sound and are just tools used to build a narrative about it, words that will always be an overwrite upon what is ultimately unwritten, and unknowing, in other words, words are an imprint of what is ultimately without an image, as in consciousness, this unknown, made known as and through a mirror image.
BUT WHY would LIfe CREATE a WORD CREATING 'creature' IF the 'narrative' that that 'creature' is 'creating' was for NO 'meaning' NOR NO 'purpose' AT ALL?

WHY can 'you', creatures, NOT STOP CREATING the NARRATIVE?

WHAT is Driving 'you' TO KEEP GOING, and KEEP CREATING, if 'you' can NOT STOP "yourselves"?

Is it NOT like 'you' are DRIVEN to KEEP GOING UNTIL the UNKNOWN BECOMES Known?

After all, at EVERY given moment was has BECOME KNOWN was ONCE the unknown.
Dontaskme wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:54 pm Ultimately, sound which is just the vibration of pure ultimate silent unknowing stillness giving the illusory sense that life is known as it is written, as and through the word which is bascially just sound that is then translated as symbolic squiggly marks upon a blank surface put there by a pen, pencil or any solid material instrument that makes contact with the blank surface.
But that 'you', human beings, DO and CREATED these squiggly and straight marks does NOT mean that there is NO A Guider and Knower WITHIN 'you' that is continually providing Life ENERGY for 'you' ALL to just KEEP GOING, correct?
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Age »

Dontaskme wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 2:14 pm
Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 11:48 am
I am NOT SURE what you are 'trying to' ALLEGE here.

But anyway, CLAIMING that the earth 'formed' OVER 4.6 billion years ago, when, OBVIOUSLY, the earth is STILL 'forming' NOW, is a bit MISLEADING is it NOT?
Well, that would be your version then wouldn't it, that the earth is still forming now, and was not formed over 4.6 billion years ago.
NO, that is NO 'my version' AT ALL.

MY VERSION IS DIFFERENT to what you WROTE here.
Dontaskme wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 2:14 pm Which incidently, I do not wish or have any intent to take away your assertion that the earth is still forming now, because it's your version of events that you are entitled to hold if that is your truth, and so who am I to refute what is your truth.
BUT you could NOT REFUTE that the earth is STILL in a PROCESS of FORMING, or FORMATION.

This is just a VERY SIMPLE Fact, which NO one could REFUTE.
Dontaskme wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 2:14 pm
Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 11:48 amTo me, it would be a bit like saying the Universe WAS 'created' at the big bang, when OBVIOUSLY, SOME 'thing' PRIOR to the 'big bang' MADE or CREATED the so-called 'big bang', which would, OBVIOUSLY, HAVE TO BE A PART OF 'the Universe', and, the Universe is STILL IN 'creation' and so the Universe was NEVER 'created', BEFORE.

Unless, OF COURSE, we want to LOOK AT and TALK ABOUT the Fact that there is ONLY the HERE-NOW, WHERE EVERY 'thing' IS BEING CREATED, ALL AT ONCE, it could be argued.
OK then, lets return to the original question you posited, which was in regard to the thing being responsible for the earth ..to which I will answer... the SUN is responsible for the earth.
And what is so-called 'responsible' for the sun?
Dontaskme wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 2:14 pm How does that answer swing with you Age?
That answer, literally, SWINGS as just ANOTHER DEFLECTION, with me.

And what do you actually mean by 'responsible' here?

One could EASILY REMOVE the sun, figuratively speaking, and the earth will STILL be existing, and 'forming'.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9565
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Harbal »

Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:51 pm Do you LIKE to be INFORMED when YOUR CONCLUSIONS, and/or JUDGMENTS, are Incorrect, partially and/or wholly?

Or, in other words, if what you BELIEVE was true was NOT true, then would you like to HEAR 'it'?
My first choice would always be the truth.
BUT HOW could A 'thing' which you BELIEVE could NOT even exist send an angel to you, or do absolutely ANY thing?
If God exists, he exists regardless of my disbelief.
Also, WHY have you CONCLUDED that God is a "he"?
I haven't. I have concluded that there probably is no God, and therefore probably has no gender. I chose the pronoun, "he", because it is the one most conventionally used when referring to God.
Do you KNOW WHERE this DISTORTED CONCLUSION and BELIEF even came from, EXACTLY?
No.
WHY do you NOT appear to be ABLE TO COMPREHEND that WHILE one is BELIEVING or DISBELIEVING some 'thing' is true, then there is absolutely NOTHING that could 'come-to-light' and SHOW OTHERWISE?
That doesn't make sense, so it isn't a question of comprehending it, unless one is to comprehend it as nonsense, of course.
Maybe if you provide AN EXAMPLE of while you are BELIEVING, or DISBELIEVING, some 'thing' is true, HOW EXACTLY CONTRARY 'evidence' or 'proof' could be SHOWN or EXPLAINED, to you, then I COULD LEARN HOW to PROVIDE such 'evidence' AND 'proof' to 'you', human beings.
I did give you an example. The example of God sending an angel.
BECAUSE it is AN IMPOSSIBILITY to BELIEVE, or DISBELIEVE, some 'thing' is true WHILE AT THE EXACT SAME TIME OPEN to 'it' NOT being true AT ALL NOR PARTIALLY.
I didn't make that claim, so I am not going to be held responsible for justifying it.
LOL
LOL
LOL

Well then 'it' was OBVIOUSLY NEVER EVER 'irrefutable'.
Exactly.
But i do NOT 'believe' in irrefutable truths in ANY way. So, what made you ASSUME, SAY, and WRITE the 'thing' that you just did here?
But you obviously do believe in them, even if it isn't obvious to you.
Also, in 'what' WAY were you ASSUMING I did 'believe' in irrefutable truths, EXACTLY?
I'm not sure how to answer that. Will you give me a list of different ways of assuming something, so that I might choose an appropriate one?
So, you ADMIT that you CONCLUDE 'things' to be true, right, or correct but which, in fact, may NOT be true, right, NOR correct AT ALL, right?
No, I am not admitting anything. I am saying that I tend to think in terms of varying probability, rather than absolute truth. Of course, in actuality, I treat most things that I consider to be highly probable as if they were truths, for the sake of expediency.
LOL but 'you', human beings, do NOT HAVE TO CONCLUDE 'things'.

SEE, what 'you' CAN DO INSTEAD is just REMAIN OPEN.
I don't remember ever asserting otherwise.
This 'mind' 'thing', which you speak of, is that 'thing' that is part 'consciousness' but NOT ALL 'consciousness', correct?
I've abandoned any hope of us arriving at an agreed upon definition of "mind".
But you do NOT BELIEVE in ANY irrefutable truths, correct?

If yes, then this implies that, to you, there are NO irrefutable truths AT ALL, right?

If yes, then this means that you will ALWAYS be doing some 'thing'?
However much something appears to be the truth, how can you possibly know that nothing could ever happen, or come to light, that would refute it?
What does have 'the importance' to you here?
I have no idea.
Age wrote:
Harbal wrote: I think there will always be things that I can never know for sure, and I can accept that.
Okay, like 'what', for example?
Well, if you claim something to be irrefutibly true, for example, I can't know for sure that actually know it is irrefutibly true.
Also, are you under some sort of illusion that i could NOT or could NEVER accept 'that'?
Also, are you under some sort of illusion that i could NOT or could NEVER accept 'that'?
I don't think I'm under any such illusion, as I haven't even considered the matter.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9565
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Harbal »

Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 2:03 pm
Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:24 pm
Yes, that's what some sort of councillor said to my wife.
Well it is an IRREFUTABLE Fact.
You might say so, but I don't know that it is.
WHY would you NOT 'accept' "her" drinking? It was OBVIOUS that "she" was drinking right?
Are you deliberately misunderstanding me? I would not regard her drinking, and its consequences, as something that could be accepted.
What is the 'it' word here in relation to, EXACTLY?
The problem that my wife claimed her drinking was a response to.
Do you here mean 'could not' or 'had not'?
I can't honestly say.
Age wrote:
Harbal wrote: Unless you provide justification for making that assertion, I have to regard it as meaningless.
Do 'you' HAVE TO, or, CHOOSE TO?
Please stop asking pointless questions.
Age wrote:
Harbal wrote: Well I suppose it is something you just have to put up with if you insist on involving yourself with human beings.
But NOT ALL human beings are like 'you', "harbal".
Okay, then I'll revise it to, I suppose it is something you just have to put up with if you insist on involving yourself with me.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22265
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Immanuel Can »

Harbal wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 3:21 pm I suppose it is something you just have to put up with if you insist on involving yourself with me.
Wow, H.

It's hard to watch you talk with Age, trying to wrench some wisdom from thence. It's like watching you try to ring blood out of a stone.

Are you sure you want to do that?
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9565
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: The meaning of life

Post by Harbal »

Age wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 2:09 pm So, if the so-called 'nature' of 'you', human beings, is to BELIEVE 'things' ARE true when they are NOT necessarily true AT ALL, then this helps in EXPLAINING WHY it is taking SO LONG for 'you', human beings, to come to SEE and REALIZE thee ACTUAL IRREFUTABLE Truth of 'things'.

Also, and by the way, that is NOT the 'nature of human beings' AT ALL, and this is PROVED IRREFUTABLY True by ALL of 'you'.
My impression is that you have a poor understanding of human nature.
Great, will you help me in coming up with a better way of putting 'it'?
I don't think I can.
Age wrote:
Harbal wrote:
The source of the intention being the imagination of those striving to progress.
But WHY 'imagination'?

Could it NOT be from the 'source' of thee One who IS the 'Driver', 'Guider', or 'Instinctual Knower' from DEEP WITHIN ALL of 'us'?
I have no idea what you are referring to here, as being "thee One who IS the 'Driver', 'Guider', or 'Instinctual Knower' from DEEP WITHIN ALL of 'us."
Post Reply