What is the meaning of life?

[lacuna]

2 hours ago, IFR said:

Models like Phineas Gage persuade me to a materialist view on matters of the mind. Our brain merely provides the neurochemical signals stimulated by external experiences. That's the complete picture.

Maybe the love and affection of your favorite pet gives you that happiness. Maybe paying someone to torture an animal so you can enjoy delicious hotdogs gives you happiness. Maybe raising your children well gives you happiness. Maybe the thrill of kidnapping children so you can torture them and make delicious hotdogs out of them makes you happy.

I don't know if it's meaningful to ascribe meaning to happiness or life.

Inefficient. If you are taught that the way to happiness is hunting people for sport, mathematically speaking, you'll have one happy person (the hunter) and one unhappy one (the hunted).

If you're taught that the way to happiness is sharing some delicious homemade madeleines with someone, you'll have twice as many happy people as in the above.

[IFR]

2 hours ago, lacuna said:

Inefficient. If you are taught that the way to happiness is hunting people for sport, mathematically speaking, you'll have one happy person (the hunter) and one unhappy one (the hunted).

If you're taught that the way to happiness is sharing some delicious homemade madeleines with someone, you'll have twice as many happy people as in the above.

I'm not sure why you are bringing utilitarianism into this? I don't see how that has bearing on whether there is meaning to the process of "external stimulation -> neurochemical reaction-> interpretation of neurochemical reaction as happiness". For a solipsist, hunting people for sport (if such an interaction gave the stimulation resulting in their happiness) would, mathematically speaking, result in one relevant person being happy and one irrelevant person being unhappy, so it would be efficient.

As an interesting aside, your argument for utilitarianism is itself solipsistic. To make madeleines to share with someone, in an effort to bring happiness to two individuals, one generally requires milk and eggs. In modern society, the production of milk and eggs is usually achieved by putting animals in extreme duress. Stores overstock these supplies so that they are always available for purchase at your convenience, which leads to waste and additional animals put in duress. Your utilitarianistic argument for bringing the temporary happiness of two people enjoying madeleines at the expense of the enduring suffering of many animals is only utilitarian in the sense that the happiness of the two people is relevant and the unhappiness of the many animals is irrelevant.

Edited July 12, 2023 by IFR

[Nas!]

Happiness is an impermanent condition.  Although, so is life, I suppose.  
 

Best to cultivate equanimity. 

[Theda Baratheon]

11 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

That's fucking amazing. Please tell me there are pics of this. 

ETA: Also which character were you? 

I was the fckn troll of course  yes there are many pics somewhere - will have to search them out lmao 

[Larry of the Lawn]

To be excellent to each other 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Theda Baratheon said:

I was the fckn troll of course  yes there are many pics somewhere - will have to search them out lmao 

Hahaha. Now I really need to see them. 

[Zorral]

All are born.  Some live, for a while. All die.

[DireWolfSpirit]

On 7/11/2023 at 6:16 PM, butterweedstrover said:

Don’t tell me what makes you happy, tell me what is the meaning of happiness and what is the ingredient for it to come out of the oven. 

Doesnt it just depend on how ones neurotransmitters are wired and  whatever stimulates thier dopamine levels?

MDMA, Molly/Ecstasy and LSD are temporary  fuels for that engine. 

Harmony with the natural world and nature is a more sustainable and healthier route for such journey. This makes me consider Buddhism as a good answer for some. 

The shoreline, a magnificent tree stand, waterfalls and mountain views, all harmony inducers to a correctly wired human animal.

But then again others get these things from congested, smog filled metropolitan squalor, I just think they are doing it wrong.

Edited July 14, 2023 by DireWolfSpirit

[Sw33t Summ3r Ch1ld]

The meaning of life is to do unto others as you would have them do unto you and to love others as you love yourself. This is the Golden Rule. One must be only open to the world and it’s inhabitants. Open-mindedness is fundamental to becoming who you are meant to be which is one of the fundamental rules of life.

[IFR]

4 hours ago, Jikm said:

The meaning of life is to do unto others as you would have them do unto you and to love others as you love yourself. This is the Golden Rule. One must be only open to the world and it’s inhabitants. Open-mindedness is fundamental to becoming who you are meant to be which is one of the fundamental rules of life.

I find this an interesting takeaway. Life can only be sustained by the destruction and consumption of other life, and the avoidance of one's own destruction and consumption, which is a direct contradiction to the rule you state. To find that the meaning of life is a contradiction to the fundamental mechanism of life is a fascinatingly paradoxical view.

Edited July 17, 2023 by IFR

[Larry of the Lawn]

1 minute ago, IFR said:

I find this an interesting takeaway. Life can only be sustained by the destruction and consumption of other life, and the avoidance of one's own destruction and consumption, which is a direct contradiction to the rule you state. To find that the meaning of life is a contradiction to the fundamental mechanism of life is a fascinatingly paradoxical view.

If you limit the Golden Rule to humans you don't run into that contradiction except in very extreme circumstances.    

[IFR]

11 minutes ago, Larry of the Lake said:

If you limit the Golden Rule to humans you don't run into that contradiction except in very extreme circumstances.    

Such a rule does run into the problem that different people have different preferences, and what is good for oneself does not necessarily serve others well. But one can do some mental acrobatics to contort the Golden Rule into something that makes sense, I suppose.

But yes, anthropocentrism does indeed make life philosophies that venerate humans much more functional.

Edited July 17, 2023 by IFR

[Teng Ai Hui]

4 hours ago, IFR said:

Such a rule does run into the problem that different people have different preferences, and what is good for oneself does not necessarily serve others well. But one can do some mental acrobatics to contort the Golden Rule into something that makes sense, I suppose.

But yes, anthropocentrism does indeed make life philosophies that venerate humans much more functional.

In a novel that I read a few years ago (I wish I could remember which one), one of the characters suggested that the new Golden Rule should be "treat others the way they wish to be treated."  I found a couple of articles online calling this the Platinum Rule.

[RhaenysBee]

That it’s beautiful. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

On 7/13/2023 at 12:15 PM, Zorral said:

All are born.  Some live, for a while. All die.

That’s the sequence.  I would suggest “meaning” is more (and less) ephemeral.  We make and find meaning in the small things we do.  Small things, I sincerely hope, that will build into larger things.  We’re all in this together.  

(((Hugs)))

[Knight Of Winter]

On 7/18/2023 at 6:53 AM, Teng Ai Hui said:

In a novel that I read a few years ago (I wish I could remember which one), one of the characters suggested that the new Golden Rule should be "treat others the way they wish to be treated."  I found a couple of articles online calling this the Platinum Rule.

I'm not sure this would be a fine heuristics good portion of the time. It presumes that a person in question (who wishes to be treated certain way) is mature and emotionally healthy enough that their wish is good and productive. And while that can certainly be the case some of the times, other times it's plainly not. Person can wish for others to treat them in the way it can only be described as bad either for themselves, people around them, or society as a whole. You have people who wish to dominate others and others to subdue themselves. You have people who feel guilty about something and wish to be punished. You have people who only seek validation from others. You have people who wish to be a part of a cult. 

In all these cases, I don't think others should treat the person in question "the way they wish to be treated" - in fact, quite the opposite. 

[DireWolfSpirit]

On 7/17/2023 at 11:53 PM, Teng Ai Hui said:

In a novel that I read a few years ago (I wish I could remember which one), one of the characters suggested that the new Golden Rule should be "treat others the way they wish to be treated."  I found a couple of articles online calling this the Platinum Rule.

Not certain I can embrace treating the worst of us the way they may wish. It can be burdensome to accomodate "needy" personalities. Sometimes I just like to be left the hell alone, while those "needy" personalities are trying to extract some response or even manipulate my actions/behavior.

This can be as subtle as a door greeter when I do not feel like speaking or a work colleague who is "reinventing the wheel" and wants you to participate when you are sure its a pretty futile use of your time/energy.

My self happiness needs, may have to trump giving everyone what they want out of me or as in the example, may require me to not treat some the way they want. 

I reserve a little selfishness to my own peace.

[Lord of Oop North]

Crush your enemies

See them driven before you

And hear the lamentations.

[Erik of Hazelfield]

To sail on a sunny day in a good breeze

To share a nice barbecue dinner with friends 

To make love to my woman 

To see the joy in my son’s face as he discovers something new in the world 

To talk for hours to my brother

To gaze into the night sky and be overwhelmed by the beauty of the stars

To die satisfied, knowing I really, truly lived