Philosophy

[Age]

We might think there must be an objective reality, but I don't see how we can ever fully know what it is. And even if it were possible to discover what it is, we will never be able to experience it. Scientific instruments can tell us that there are all sorts of things going on that we were hitherto completely unaware of, but knowing about them does not change the way we experience life.

We access "Objective" reality through logical deduction and inference.

For example, human senses have "blind-spots". So just because a ball leaves your field-of-vision, doesn't mean the ball becomes non-existent. If you ignore a ball thrown at you, your ignorance does not negate the ball coming at you. Closing your eyes isn't going to stop it. You have to treat Reality as Objective, by default. You "know" of things that you do not immediately perceive, which is why you move or catch the ball.

The ball was always "non-existent". Any existence the ball had depended on human ideas and perceptions.

WHY do some human beings make this CLAIM?

WHY is absolutely ANY and ALL 'existence', supposedly, depended upon human beings?

Do 'you', "belinda", think or BELIEVE that there was absolutely NOTHING AT ALL, then just ALL of sudden human beings existed, along with their ideas and perceptions, and along with EVERY thing else?

Perceptions are filters of possibilities and don't display reality to us.

How would you KNOW that 'reality' is NOT being displayed to 'you' RIGHT NOW?

If ANY one CLAIMS that 'reality' can NOT be observed NOR experienced, then HOW do they KNOW that their OWN perceptions are NOT a display of 'reality', itself?

[Harbal]

If you do NOT YET SEE how you could EVER FULLY KNOW what some 'thing' is, EXACTLY, then how do you ALREADY KNOW that you could NEVER experience that NOT YET KNOWN 'thing'?

I will never be able to see what is happening when two sub-atomic particles collide, let alone immerse myself in the process and experience it.

[Harbal]

How would you KNOW that 'reality' is NOT being displayed to 'you' RIGHT NOW?

I believe that some animals only see in monochrome, or black and white. If I and such an animal were to look at a given object, we would perceive it differently from each other. We can't both be seeing reality can we?

[Age]

Okay, so what would going beyond that look like?

Science for the most part,

Humans have developed tools to 'see' beyond our visible senses. So a tool can detect light at Ultraviolet or Infrared spectrums. The Hadron Collider just started revving up, discovering new information about sub-atomic particles. Humanity has a long record of Chemistry and Physics, new discoveries and inventions. With Physics, humans can run computations on phenomena that humans cannot directly interact with, for example with nuclear radiation, or deep space travel.

All of that is accessed through Deduction (Rationality/Logic) and acceptance of Objective Reality.

WHO accepts that as 'Objective Reality'?

Perhaps these Objective approaches can be applied to Meaning, Purpose, Goals, Significance of Life. If they can, and I believe they can, then it lends large credence as to the Meaning of a particular life, or a society, compared to others, and that obviously (even through common sense) you and I can admit that some lives are more or less "Meaningful" than others.

Would you like to put some names to a list of who's lives you BELIEVE have MORE 'meaning' than "others" have?

A life wasted on drug-abuse, over-dosing in a ditch in an alleyway, never to be remembered or cared about by others...is that more or less meaningful?

I have gained MORE 'meaning' and MORE 'insight' out of discovering and learning WHY those human beings were, like they were, and did, what they did, than I have out of just reading what other ones thought was true.

Here's another question: why waste your Life?!?

Here is another question, 'WHY waste "another's" life?'

Life is precious, don't waste it, right??

'Life' is, supposedly, 'precious' in relation to 'what', EXACTLY?

Also, what have 'you', ACTUALLY done with 'your life', which is ACTUALLY BETTER or MORE MEANINGFUL than just enjoying 'your life' with drugs?

[Age]

I said, 'In the visible sense, God is thee Universe, Itself.

I NEVER said, 'God is ALL of the 'things', within thee Universe, Itself.

That is the point that you WERE missing here.

If God is "thee Universe, itself" then I interpret that as "all things". How do you mean it?

ALL 'things', TOGETHER, is just One Thing, ONLY?

Joining or combing EVERY 'thing' together, literally, Creates One Everything, which is just thee Universe, Itself.

There is ONLY One Everything, although there are MANY 'things'. Just like there is ONLY One Universe. The Universe, Itself, is the sum of ALL 'things', but It is still ONLY One 'Thing'.

'Everything' and EVERY 'thing' are two completely, and VERY, DIFFERENT 'things'.

Everything is One Thing ONLY. Whereas, EVERY thing is just a part of the One Everything.

[Harbal]

ALL 'things', TOGETHER, is just One Thing, ONLY?

Joining or combing EVERY 'thing' together, literally, Creates One Everything, which is just thee Universe, Itself.

There is ONLY One Everything, although there are MANY 'things'. Just like there is ONLY One Universe. The Universe, Itself, is the sum of ALL 'things', but It is still ONLY One 'Thing'.

'Everything' and EVERY 'thing' are two completely, and VERY, DIFFERENT 'things'.

Everything is One Thing ONLY. Whereas, EVERY thing is just a part of the One Everything.

That is just playing about with words, and sheds absolutely no light on anything.

[Wizard22]

But in order to get excited about it, or look forward to it, don't you have to have some concept of how our perception of reality might be changed?

Yeah, that's what Physics is all about, mechanical, empirical, objective change of Reality. Everybody changes the world, in some small way, by mere existence. Meaning of Life tends to shine in those who change the world significantly.

If one person can happily spend his life playing computer games, and another needs to be making scientific breakthroughs at the cutting edge of physics to feel fulfilled, who is to say which life is more wasteful?

That's the subject of debate. But it seems obvious that most will agree that wasting life playing computer games is less significant than others who do make great changes and accomplish great achievements.

[Age]

None of that indicates "meaning" to me. "Impact" and "meaning" are not synonyms as far as I'm concerned

A criminal may live a life of crime, robbing, attacking, generally brutalizing and assaulting others, and deem his life meaningful to him.

1. This is one very HUGE ASSUMPTION that that HUMAN BEING would 'deem' their life meaningful to them. What are you basing this PRESUMPTION on, EXACTLY?

2. Also, the 'human being' NAMED and LABED "criminal" would NOT and even could NOT do ANY other 'thing' than live a life of crime, et cetera.

3. A more correct way to express what you are saying and meaning here is replacing the 'may' word with 'will', and then adding the 'may' word inbetween the 'and' word and the 'deem' word.

Just because you or I objective to "his Meaning",

How could ANY human being logically and accurately 'object' to another human being just 'deeming their life meaningful, TO THEM'?

doesn't overrule what he thinks or believes subjectively about himself, his morality, or his ethics. So you can call his life "impactful" instead of "meaningful", but that only side-steps the larger issue: how can lives be lived most meaningfully?

'Meaningful' in relation to 'what', EXACTLY?

Some people deem their life to be 'meaningless', to them. So, HOW could their lives EVER be lived so-called 'most meaningfully'?

If they even should be? Or can they be? Or what would it look like, exactly? Must it be, "morally good"?

SO MANY questions here.

Have you even come to thee Truly OBJECTIVE, and thus AGREE UPON, 'meaning of Life', YET?

If no, then these other questions here are just moot.

[Wizard22]

The ball was always "non-existent". Any existence the ball had depended on human ideas and perceptions. Perceptions are filters of possibilities and don't display reality to us.

I disagree, Existence is not dependent upon your or my Perception/Senses/Experience.

[Wizard22]

WHO accepts that as 'Objective Reality'?

Scientists and Empiricists

Would you like to put some names to a list of who's lives you BELIEVE have MORE 'meaning' than "others" have?

Alexander the Great, Isaac Newton, Plato, for starters.

Here is another question, 'WHY waste "another's" life?'

That's a moral dilemma here. People can be, and often are, misled into Falsities and Lies, and pursue goals that they first thought were very meaningful and important to them, only to later realize that they were duped. Consider Religion, or political Propaganda, or Commercialism...aren't these the dangers and threats to a Meaningful Life?

'Life' is, supposedly, 'precious' in relation to 'what', EXACTLY?

In relation to Death and Non-life.

Also, what have 'you', ACTUALLY done with 'your life', which is ACTUALLY BETTER or MORE MEANINGFUL than just enjoying 'your life' with drugs?

I've pursued Physical Theorems which I believe to be meaningful and important. I can't go into detail about them publicly, until I have research and data completed. They're meaningful TO ME, anyway. I think the challenge is Meaning between people, between life, and 'objectively' so.

What do you believe is a Meaningful Life?

[Wizard22]

ALL 'things', TOGETHER, is just One Thing, ONLY?

Joining or combing EVERY 'thing' together, literally, Creates One Everything, which is just thee Universe, Itself.

There is ONLY One Everything, although there are MANY 'things'. Just like there is ONLY One Universe. The Universe, Itself, is the sum of ALL 'things', but It is still ONLY One 'Thing'.

'Everything' and EVERY 'thing' are two completely, and VERY, DIFFERENT 'things'.

Everything is One Thing ONLY. Whereas, EVERY thing is just a part of the One Everything.

I mean Everything as "sum of all parts", not the whole and totality "itself". So we approach that term differently.

[Age]

If you do NOT YET SEE how you could EVER FULLY KNOW what some 'thing' is, EXACTLY, then how do you ALREADY KNOW that you could NEVER experience that NOT YET KNOWN 'thing'?

I will never be able to see what is happening when two sub-atomic particles collide, let alone immerse myself in the process and experience it.

1. If two, or more, sub-atomic particles have already previously collided, then you have already 'immersed' "yourself" in the process and experienced it ALREADY. But just maybe NOT In the way you ENVISION it.

2. It could be said, and/or argued, that what IS seen 'happening' RIGHT HERE and NOW is the result of sub-atomic particles colliding. But you may mean seeing at the sub-atomic level, or perspective. But, with the continual advancements of microscopes, as well as telescopes, EVERY generation is ABLE TO physically 'see' MORE 'things' than previous human beings, AND, LESS 'things', than future human beings.

3. Also, to 'see' can mean to 'understand', as well. So, in this sense, 'you' ARE ABLE TO 'see' and/or 'understand' MORE of 'what is happening when two sub-atomic particles collide', at 'that' level or perspective, as 'you' ARE ABLE TO 'see', and/or 'understand', MORE by just learning that 'you' are ACTUAL the RESULT of sub-atomic particles colliding, just like EVERY other human beings and objects ARE.

[Harbal]

Yeah, that's what Physics is all about, mechanical, empirical, objective change of Reality. Everybody changes the world, in some small way, by mere existence. Meaning of Life tends to shine in those who change the world significantly.

But this has always been the case. New technology often changes the way we experience our existence. To your great, great grandfather, a laptop computer wasn't even a thing, but it is probably an integral part of your life. This will continue, but it is nothing new.

That's the subject of debate. But it seems obvious that most will agree that wasting life playing computer games is less significant than others who do make great changes and accomplish great achievements.

What most agree on doesn't matter. To the game player, reaching level ten of Alien Bloodbath might be the only great accomplishment worth achieving. Should we only value our own life according to what it is worth to others?

[Age]

How would you KNOW that 'reality' is NOT being displayed to 'you' RIGHT NOW?

I believe that some animals only see in monochrome, or black and white. If I and such an animal were to look at a given object, we would perceive it differently from each other. We can't both be seeing reality can we?

You are both LOOKING AT 'Reality', Itself. But what each of you 'see', depends on the WAY you are LOOKING. As you just somewhat explained.

See, if one just LOOKS AT and PERCEIVES 'things' from one PERSPECTIVE ONLY, then they WILL have DIFFERENT VIEWS, opinions, or PERSPECTIVES.

Which, by the way, partly explains WHY there was still so much CONFUSION, in the days when this was being written, regarding 'objective' and 'relative', themselves, as well as their 'truths', and HOW, EXACTLY, each is OBTAINED, and KNOWN.

[Age]

ALL 'things', TOGETHER, is just One Thing, ONLY?

Joining or combing EVERY 'thing' together, literally, Creates One Everything, which is just thee Universe, Itself.

There is ONLY One Everything, although there are MANY 'things'. Just like there is ONLY One Universe. The Universe, Itself, is the sum of ALL 'things', but It is still ONLY One 'Thing'.

'Everything' and EVERY 'thing' are two completely, and VERY, DIFFERENT 'things'.

Everything is One Thing ONLY. Whereas, EVERY thing is just a part of the One Everything.

That is just playing about with words, and sheds absolutely no light on anything.

The one that I was replying to wrote;

"If God is "thee Universe, itself" then I interpret that as "all things". How do you mean it?"

I was just explaining, with a few added words, that what they INTERPRET as "ALL things", I MEANT IS just One Thing ONLY.

That is; the Universe, Itself, is just One 'Thing' ONLY, although It is OBVIOUSLY made up of MANY different things. EXACTLY LIKE the human being, itself, is just one thing ONLY, but which is ALSO, OBVIOUSLY, make up of MANY different things.