Thought experiment: meaning in life

[_Gunnar]

Sorry, Water Dog. From following the exchanges between you and the others on this forum, it becomes ever clearer to me that you understand Darth J. not at all, and he has you pegged! It is also abundantly clear that you will probably never understand this, no matter what anyone says.

However, if you really think you would become a sociopath if you lost your current beliefs in God and a hereafter, and your life would therefore cease to have any meaning for you, I fervently hope you remain a TBM for the rest of your life!

[_Arch Stanton]

Sorry, Water Dog. From following the exchanges between you and the others on this forum, it becomes ever clearer to me that you understand Darth J. not at all, and he has you pegged! It is also abundantly clear that you will probably never understand this, no matter what anyone says.

I read it differently. I think Darth J. does understand Water Dog but has a personality disorder that is satiated by argumentation. You on the other hand don't understand Water Dog at all.

However, if you really think you would become a sociopath if you lost your current beliefs in God and a hereafter, and your life would therefore cease to have any meaning for you, I fervently hope you remain a TBM for the rest of your life!

If I read Water Dog correctly I think what he actually said is that there are two types of people who don't believe in god/afterlife. 1) Sociopaths, 2) Emotional Slaves. If there is no meaning beyond that which we create, it's not logical to be concerned with others. Empathy, love, selflessness being a pre-programmed biological urge, just like sex, and ought to be bridled and controlled. In reality though people are weak-minded. True atheists are generally ill-disciplined sociopaths, selfish only to the extent they are able to weakly control their mind. They can't help but care a little. They would likely become true sociopaths not for their laziness.

[_palerobber]

Sorry, Water Dog. From following the exchanges between you and the others on this forum, it becomes ever clearer to me that you understand Darth J. not at all, and he has you pegged! It is also abundantly clear that you will probably never understand this, no matter what anyone says.

I read it differently. I think Darth J. does understand Water Dog but has a personality disorder that is satiated by argumentation. You on the other hand don't understand Water Dog at all.

However, if you really think you would become a sociopath if you lost your current beliefs in God and a hereafter, and your life would therefore cease to have any meaning for you, I fervently hope you remain a TBM for the rest of your life!

If I read Water Dog correctly I think what he actually said is that there are two types of people who don't believe in god/afterlife. 1) Sociopaths, 2) Emotional Slaves. If there is no meaning beyond that which we create, it's not logical to be concerned with others. Empathy, love, selflessness being a pre-programmed biological urge, just like sex, and ought to be bridled and controlled. In reality though people are weak-minded. True atheists are generally ill-disciplined sociopaths, selfish only to the extent they are able to weakly control their mind. They can't help but care a little. They would likely become true sociopaths not for their laziness.

great insights there, Water Dog, er, i mean Arch Stanton.

you arrived at this board just in time, Arch. more than a few posters were in danger of mistaking Water Dog for an amoral and potentially dangerous 'empty vessel' before you showed up and in your very first post set the record straight by ... uh ... reparaphrasing the very sentiments Water Dog already expressed which led people to make that assessment of him to begin with.

[_CaliforniaKid]

Why wouldn't it be logical to be concerned with others? If one knows one's an empathizer who derives happiness from concern for others, why would one try to turn oneself into a sociopath? Why should contentment with one's emotions be equated with slavery to them? This is about the dumbest line of argument I ever heard. I'm inclined to agree with WD's critics that only a low-level sociopath would make these arguments.

[_Blixa]

I own this shirt. It is one of my favorites.



If I have only 24 hours to live, I might wear it one last time.

Gorgeous. I must have one also.

[_MrStakhanovite]

Bonus: what do you think this experiment is really exploring? (what you think, not "try to guess the right answer")

How meaning is ascribed or given to an event or action. I think what this shows is that something can be meaningful despite not being anchored to something in the future. It gives the lie to the claim that if God doesn’t exist and/or if there is no afterlife than the only option left is some kind of radical nihilism.

[_mentalgymnast]

Let's assume that the world is going to explode in 24 hours. You know for a certainty that this is going to happen. And 24 hours later, the world in fact explodes.

Let's also assume you have learned with certainty that there is no life after death (how you would know this doesn't matter, because thought experiment).

Twenty four hours later, the world in fact explodes, and everyone completely ceases to exist.

1. Would you choose to hug your loved ones before the 24 hours were up?

Yes.

2. Would hugging your loved ones have any meaning 24 hours later?

Doesn't matter.

3. As a variation, you are out by yourself somewhere and cannot contact anyone else before 24 hours are up. If you go to watch the last sunset ever by yourself, does that experience have any meaning?

Yes.

Bonus: what do you think this experiment is really exploring? (what you think, not "try to guess the right answer")

Living in the here and now...that's really all we CAN do.

Regards,
MG

[_Quasimodo]

I love sunsets and in this case it would be a heavy metaphor. I hope I would have the presence of mind at the end of the world to acknowledge it. I have never figured out what the meaning of a beautiful sunset is, yet it does have meaning for me. The meaning would be personal, of course.

Just for you, here's a Thomas Kinkade sunset. Bask in the philosophical banality!

Thanks Darth!

I love it! I'm going to print it out and put it on my office wall along with my Margaret Keane prints of children with big eyes and my velvet Elvis painting collection.

[_CameronMO]

Blah, blah, blah.

LOL. I have a feeling I know who this is (in real life). And you're a jackass.

[_Themis]

My point is very simply that self-created meaning in life isn't actually worth anything.

Sure it is. It worth what ever the individual or individuals value it as.

It's not logical to be concerned with feelings which themselves have no actual meaning.

It has what ever meaning people want them to have, so yes, most people are logically concerned with feelings.

If by definition life only has whatever meaning we individually assign to it, then also by definition that meaning is selfish in nature.

Incorrect. People can assign meanings that have others interests as more important to theirs.

A person could still dedicate their temporary existence to others but 1) wouldn't that still be an act of selfishness and 2) what for?

If it is, then everything we do, religious or not, is selfish.