Life has no purpose - prove me wrong.

[ZenRaiden]

Life has no purpose prove me wrong!

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

the purpose of life is to accelerate entropy

this is provably true

 

[Puffy]

Life having no purpose is a definite statement that I think requires as much proof as it having purpose. The agnostic position sounds the most reasonable to me.

I feel like all that can be said is that life having purpose is a subjective thing. My life has purpose because I give it purpose. This is a pragmatic thing as without purpose I will fall into depression. So my life having a purpose serves my wellbeing and enhances my life overall. This has been my observation of those close to me as well.

I admit I do believe that life having purpose is an objective thing. This is mostly oweing to my own spiritual beliefs that others might not share. I've had a lot of experiences with entheogens like ayahuasca and peyote that have my informed my worldview and sense of self. Through those experiences I've noticed a definite pattern of becoming more aware of patterns of suffering and limitation and a movement towards freedom, living with an open heart and finding ways to live and share joy. This has been the common experience of others I've shared these experiences with and I do see underlying it a form of purpose to being alive.

I'm also a gnostic and I don't feel a need to prove my experiences as I don't have a need to convert others to my point of view. So ultimately this is the purpose I give life based on my own experience of it.

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

This has been the common experience of others I've shared these experiences with and I do see underlying it a form of purpose to being alive.

purpose as more of a journey and less of a destination point

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

I'm also a gnostic and I don't feel a need to prove my experiences as I don't have a need to convert others to my point of view.

 

[Puffy]

This has been the common experience of others I've shared these experiences with and I do see underlying it a form of purpose to being alive.

purpose as more of a journey and less of a destination point

I don't think that's contradictory with what I meant. Apologies if that's not clear from my post, I don't take as much time to finesse my posts here as I did in the past.

Also, it's a personal bias of my own but I have a preference for text responses and don't like engaging with or listening to videos. Vipassana sounds great and I'm sure it's something I'll try at some point in my life.

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

Vipassana sounds great and I'm sure it's something I'll try at some point in my life.

it seems to mesh with what you were saying

 

[dr froyd]

when people say "life has no purpose" what is implied is that life has no predefined purpose - as in supplied from a god or whatever. But if a purpose was predefined then life would definitely not have any purpose - you would just be a slave. I.e. life has purpose if and only if you make one yourself

 

[Puffy]

Vipassana sounds great and I'm sure it's something I'll try at some point in my life.

it seems to mesh with what you were saying

Ah gotcha, I couldn't tell if you were agreeing with me or not from what you shared. I'd definitely like to try it when I get an opportunity.

 

[Puffy]

when people say "life has no purpose" what is implied is that life has no predefined purpose - as in supplied from a god or whatever. But if a purpose was predefined then life would definitely not have any purpose - you would just be a slave. I.e. life has purpose if and only if you make one yourself

I'd argue that ultimately an objective purpose to life cannot be demonstrated. Even in the example I gave, it's a purpose that I have arrived at making sense of my own experience. So, even if someone believes there is predefined purpose, they have made it themselves in the end as it only exists for them by virtue of their own belief.

If people are willing to own the conclusions they've come to, and the ramifications it has on their own lives, I don't think they're slaves even if it's a pre-defined purpose they subscribe to or believe in. As we are basically always creators and masters of our own beliefs.

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

But if a purpose was predefined then life would definitely not have any purpose - you would just be a slave.

true

 

[Old Things]

Here's a quote from my forthcoming book. The subject is slightly different because here I am talking about transcendence but it more or less applies to purpose as well.

I’d be glad to explore the various positions on transcendence. As far as I can discern, there are three distinct types of transcendence, all rooted in the psychology of the heart and one’s orientation toward a transcendent reality.

Naturalistic Transcendence

The secular humanist, naturalist, existentialist, and nihilist share a common belief that transcendence is achieved by creating one’s own purpose. This perspective aligns with sentiments expressed in Pablo Picasso’s quote, “The meaning of life is to find your gift. The purpose of life is to give it away.” Jordan Peterson, although using different terms, also conveys a similar outlook. However, a critical issue arises when the purpose created is not ultimately rooted in objective reality but is, instead, a pragmatic exercise in self-deception.

This approach entails the risk of living in a state of pretense, where the self-generated purpose becomes a grand illusion. Those who adopt this view may not fear God, as their purpose is construed as a subjective construct rather than an inherent truth. This perspective paints a potentially bleak picture of reality, suggesting that life, from birth to death, is a process of self-delusion. The emphasis on creating a legacy and being remembered for all time may lead to nihilism, given that only a few individuals are remembered long after their death with any lasting impact.

Moreover, the contradiction lies in the pursuit of creating one’s purpose. If the goal is to be remembered and make one’s name great throughout history, it contradicts the idea of living life to transcend the present moment. This paradox emerges because the focus on being remembered prioritizes the future over the present.

The underlying question arises: If one contends that creating individual purpose is ingrained in the fabric of the universe, how can progress in transcendence be measured when, after life concludes, there is no tangible evidence of an eternal reward?

Free Will and Transcendence

Many traditions of Christianity and other religions place our transcendence in our ability to choose it freely. Logically, it follows that they believe in a form of transcendence rooted in the mystical, supernatural, or ethereal. Their perspective often centers on the idea that individuals are the “captain of their own ship,” creating realities through their power to choose. While this perspective is seen as a positive step, it ultimately falls short for two reasons.

If you’ve ever done something you regret, you might not be as transcendent a creature as you’d hope, finding yourself caught in actions contrary to your desires. It’s akin to a master-slave dynamic with yourself, resembling Gollum from “Lord of the Rings.” On one hand, you aspire to own up to your decisions, for better or worse. On the other hand, your actions often lack a universally relatable quality, given that they are heavily influenced by context rather than being all-encompassing.

It positions the self as the pinnacle of what can happen. Now, for us Christians, we don’t hold that belief. We don’t consider ourselves the most important entity in the universe; Christ is. Without Christ as our liberator from our own choices, we could never approach Him. He’s the one who acts on our behalf by sacrificing Himself on the cross. Is anyone else volunteering to be crucified because of their sin? Yeah, I don’t think that’s very realistic either.

My View on Transcendence

In my personal perspective, transcendence can only originate from something beyond ourselves, propelling us into a state beyond normalcy rather than being the primary force behind our ascension. From my viewpoint, God serves not only as our Christ—symbolized as a lamb sacrificed for the redemption of the unrighteous—but also as our savior. His work extends salvation to all who accept Him, accomplished solely through His mercy. We cannot achieve salvation independently. Our response to transcendence is evident in either experiences or changed behaviors, but the act of moving into something greater is not our own; it’s orchestrated by God. The same divine power that raised Jesus from the dead resides within us, not because we consciously “let Him into our hearts,” but because He is a righteous judge extending mercy to us. Through His grace, those who are saved can transcend, showcasing the greatness of God’s grace. Transcendence is not something we merit. If the ability to transcend were in our hands—if we could will it ourselves—then everyone desiring it would inevitably experience it. However, that's not the reality. In my view, it is through the workings of the Holy Spirit that we can transcend. It’s not our doing; it’s God elevating us so that we can glorify Him.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

Does life exist? Why does life exist?

Why does existence exist? Because I'm observing a piece of existence.

Life is apart of existence and emanates from it.

if the question were about entropy there are more efficient ways to achieve that.

Life may very well exist merely to experience existence, and we can say that because the seemingly most practical way to have discreet units of experience would be life.

or it may be completely arbitrary

 

[Black Rose]

Life to me is an exploration.

We want to know, to be, to live.

So it is a story, one for us.

We make choices.

God is something I believe in so I think we are here to learn.

God wants us to know right from wrong and physicality is where we learn this.

In my early times, I had trouble knowing right from wrong.

Because I had no purpose much other than learning.

So when that was taken away, I was alone a long time.

This created in me a deep pain, to not know what to do, to not have things to play with. So I thought a lot about meaning to my life when alone. I thought that I had to be alone for a purpose, that if I waited things would get better. I believe they did get better because I had more time to become better and grow as a person. Because every time I learned what not to do. From the pain of being alone. I knew that as long as I was able to get along with others I would one day get help.

Deep down I believe helping people is paramount to learning.

I believe that one's responsibility is about holding on no matter what.

It is my faith that continuing to help people will make me better.

This has not always resulted in me being good at helping.

Nor is it that I did not get mad and hurt people.

But I wanted to be happy and play with my toys.

Now I know that doing the right things,

sometimes requires me to ask for help.

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

if the question were about entropy there are more efficient ways to achieve that.

like what ?

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

a critical issue arises when the purpose created is not ultimately rooted in objective reality

how do you derive an "ought" from an "is" ?

 

[Cognisant]

when people say "life has no purpose" what is implied is that life has no predefined purpose - as in supplied from a god or whatever. But if a purpose was predefined then life would definitely not have any purpose - you would just be a slave. I.e. life has purpose if and only if you make one yourself

I really like this answer, it narrows down the definition of "purpose" and proves that in order for life to have purpose, to the person in question, then that purpose must come from them.

Most people don't live purposeful lives, they simply react to their circumstances according to their desires, and those that do are typically acting upon some kind of trauma or neurosis.

I think searching for purpose/meaning in one's life is ultimately a sign of dissatisfaction with life, it's like the bargaining stage of grief except instead of bargaining for your life you're trying to buy the acceptance of death.

If I devote myself to God then I won't be afraid to die...

I think it's possible to accept mortality without resigning oneself it, you don't need death to motivate you nor should you be fatalistic, just live for the sake of living and die when you die.

 

[ZenRaiden]

You guys are masters at dodging questions.
Just saying.

 

[Cognisant]

You never asked a question.

There you go, I proved you wrong

 

[ZenRaiden]

You never asked a question.

There you go, I proved you wrong

God, good point.

Let me ask it then.

Do you have a purpose in life? (specifically all of you).

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

Most people don't live purposeful lives, they simply react to their circumstances according to their desires, and those that do are typically acting upon some kind of trauma or neurosis.

I think searching for purpose/meaning in one's life is ultimately a sign of dissatisfaction with life, it's like the bargaining stage of grief except instead of bargaining for your life you're trying to buy the acceptance of death.

bingo

 

[Old Things]

a critical issue arises when the purpose created is not ultimately rooted in objective reality

how do you derive an "ought" from an "is" ?

I'm not doing that.

 

[dr froyd]

Do you have a purpose in life? (specifically all of you).

yes, but it's more a vision than a purpose. It's literally like a picture i can see in my minds eye, and it pops up on daily a basis - almost as often as my mind's eye shows me pictures of boobs

 

[Old Things]

Do you have a purpose in life?

I have precisely the purpose that God gave me. So yes.

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

a critical issue arises when the purpose created is not ultimately rooted in objective reality

you can't derive purpose from an object

 

[Old Things]

a critical issue arises when the purpose created is not ultimately rooted in objective reality

you can't derive purpose from an object

God is not an object. He is a person. Persons are where oughts are formulated.

 

[dr froyd]

I have precisely the purpose that God gave me. So yes.

religion is not a purpose, it's just lack of imagination

it's like the mcdonalds of purpose

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

God is not an object. He is a person. Persons are where oughts are formulated.

if a person is not an object

how can a person be OBJECTive ?

the two seem to be in conflict

 

[Old Things]

God is not an object. He is a person. Persons are where oughts are formulated.

if a person is not an object

how can a person be OBJECTive ?

View attachment 7899

the two seem to be in conflict

In your view, is God a person? Does God have a body? If God does not have a body but is comprised of a mind, then God is not an object.

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

In your view, is God a person? Does God have a body? If God does not have a body but is comprised of a mind, then God is not an object.

you are the one who claimed YHWH is a person

 

[Old Things]

In your view, is God a person? Does God have a body? If God does not have a body but is comprised of a mind, then God is not an object.

you are the one who claimed YHWH is a person

I'm asking about your view.

 

[Old Things]

I have precisely the purpose that God gave me. So yes.

religion is not a purpose, it's just lack of imagination

it's like the mcdonalds of purpose

What do you ground your purpose in? Looking at boobs? How fleeting! No one is going to care that you looked at boobs after you are dead.

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

In your view, is God a person? Does God have a body? If God does not have a body but is comprised of a mind, then God is not an object.

i lean towards the jewish concept of ein sof

YHWH is logically incomprehensible and unknowable from the perspective of our tiny primitive human minds

just like an ant can't know the mind of a human by speculating that a human is just like a very very smart and very very large ant

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

The teleological fallacy is the mistake of assuming that something was designed for a specific purpose just because it appears to have a function or serves a particular end.

it would be like saying that because gold makes glass turn red when they are melted together

that gold and glass were intentionally engineered specifically to make stained glass windows

 

[Old Things]

In your view, is God a person? Does God have a body? If God does not have a body but is comprised of a mind, then God is not an object.

i lean towards the jewish concept of ein sof

View attachment 7900

YHWH is logically incomprehensible and unknowable from the perspective of our tiny primitive human minds

just like an ant can't know the mind of a human by speculating that a human is just like a very very smart and very very large ant

Yet you say God is not perfect, so your God is not that grand. He is a force or some such. He cannot be known, reasoned with, or answer prayers. I believe God can interact with people because he does. I encourage you to read my easter thread to see an example of this.

https://www.intpforum.com/threads/happy-easter.29765/

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

Yet you say God is not perfect, so your God is not that grand.

you are conflating my arguments with my opinions

(IFF) you believe the world is imperfect (AND) you believe that an omniscient omnipotent creator is perfect (THEN) you have a serious problem on your hands

you are forced to confront the source of the perceived imperfection

which can't be the perfect creator

but some other force

that also can't exist

because you've already attributed omnipotence to your creator

Spoiler: click to reveal spoiler

(note: this is a logical argument, not an opinion)

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

I believe God can interact with people because he does.

ok,

i remember watching a television show called "i shouldn't be alive"

in one episode a woman was being interviewed and recounted the story of when her husband was lost at sea for more than three days

everyone thought he was dead

but she fervently prayed to her ancestral gods and setup a shrine to her wise grandmother

and when her husband miraculously returned

she had no doubt that her prayers had been answered and her gods were real and her wise grandmother had assisted her

 

[Old Things]

Yet you say God is not perfect, so your God is not that grand.

you are conflating my arguments with my opinions

(IFF) you believe the world is imperfect (AND) you believe that an omniscient omnipotent creator is perfect (THEN) you have a serious problem on your hands

you are forced to confront the source of the perceived imperfection

which can't be the perfect creator

but some other force

that also can't exist

because you've already attributed omnipotence to your creator

Spoiler: click to reveal spoiler

(note: this is a logical argument, not an opinion)

We have been over this a million times. God does not create Himself. He creates something other than Himself. This other thing is not God Himself. As such, it does not play by the same rules as God.

 

[Old Things]

I believe God can interact with people because he does.

ok,

i remember watching a television show called "i shouldn't be alive"

in one episode a woman was being interviewed and recounted the story of when her husband was lost at sea for more than three days

everyone thought he was dead

but she fervently prayed to her ancestral gods and setup a shrine to her wise grandmother

and when her husband miraculously returned

she had no doubt that her prayers had been answered and her gods were real and her wise grandmother had assisted her

What's your point?

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

God does not create Himself. He creates something other than Himself. This other thing is not God Himself. As such, it does not play by the same rules as God.

sure, ok

look

this "other thing" (presumably humans and stuff)

right

ok

this "other thing"

does YHWH know everything about it ?

i mean

are there any unknown variables added to this mix ?

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

What's your point?

obviously praying can seem to help

regardless of what you pray to

 

[Old Things]

God does not create Himself. He creates something other than Himself. This other thing is not God Himself. As such, it does not play by the same rules as God.

sure, ok

look

this "other thing" (presumably humans and stuff)

right

ok

this "other thing"

does YHWH know everything about it ?

i mean

are there any unknown variables added to this mix ?

It makes no difference because knowing is different than willing.

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

It makes no difference because knowing is different than willing.

you're kidding me

YHWH knows everything and made everything

and there are no unknown variables

and no impediment to the will of the creator

what in god's name does "willing" have to do with anything ?


what is impeding this perfect will from manifesting pure 100% perfection ?

 

[Old Things]

what in god's name does "willing" have to do with anything ?

Because there is nothing illogical about God creating rules that people should live for, but don't.

what is impeding this perfect will from manifesting pure 100% perfection ?

Free will. We have discussed this. If God say, "I create these creatures with a will of their own. They have parameters they operate under, but within those parameters, they can do various different things." To prove my point, we do not know some things about science even though we know they happen. This functions at the atomic level. We know the general behavior of atoms, but their certainty of how they behave is not only unknown to us, but it is impossible for us to know. It could go to A or B. We don't know until it happens. So God could create beings with agency (which is a premise you reject) who can choose between A, B, or C, about proposition X and they can choose any one of those. But just because they can choose between A, B, or C about proposition X does not mean that God literally takes control of their mind to force them to believe A, B, or C about proposition X. They all agree X exists. They disagree on what X means.

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

Because there is nothing illogical about God creating rules that people should live for, but don't.

this claim is provably false

essentially you're claiming that an OOC made stuff

OOC knew everything that stuff was going to do BEFORE it was even made

then OOC made some rules that it KNEW before the dawn of time would not be followed or even seen, heard, or believed by the overwhelming majority of the things it made itself

instead of tweaking the design a bit

in order to mitigate and or remove suffering

it decides instead

to create an eternal lake of fire

in order to punish the things it made all by itself

even if they never heard about the rules

 

[Old Things]

then OOC made some rules that it KNEW before the dawn of time would not be followed or even seen, heard, or believed by the overwhelming majority of the things it made itself

I mean, that is just denying a supernatural aspect of the universe. That's fine if you believe that, but it simply is not true. Your view assumes naturalism, or that is the exact argument that physicalists use that everything runs based on input-output. But there is nothing illogical about what I am saying. Think about it like an algebra equation where whatever Y is, there could be multiple explanations as X. It's the same way with humans and their respective wills.

 

[Black Rose]

involving quantum physics to make the will "free" is tricky

all I know is that we feel stuff

so might it be that God has feelings too?

yes,

but control of others is wrong to God,

so Gods "will" need respect some things as humans do bad things

not sure the free part

 

[dr froyd]

I have precisely the purpose that God gave me. So yes.

religion is not a purpose, it's just lack of imagination

it's like the mcdonalds of purpose

What do you ground your purpose in? Looking at boobs? How fleeting! No one is going to care that you looked at boobs after you are dead.

i ground it on the facticities of my life (where and when i was born, my genetics, my life experience) and then i sculpt the rest based on my tastes, like a piece of art. Then i squeeze as much juice out of it as possible. So then when im on my deathbed i can say "yeah that came out pretty nicely" and then boom im gone forever.

that's as good as i can do, in my opinion, and i don't intend to waste any time on dreaming about an afterlife. What's the point of it anyway - if you're a good boy you'll get to eat cake in a cloud for an eternity after you're dead? That's anti-life, a vulgar insult to your own existence.

as far as boobs are concerned, that's just entertainment

 

[Old Things]

I have precisely the purpose that God gave me. So yes.

religion is not a purpose, it's just lack of imagination

it's like the mcdonalds of purpose

What do you ground your purpose in? Looking at boobs? How fleeting! No one is going to care that you looked at boobs after you are dead.

i ground it on the facticities of my life (where and when i was born, my genetics, my life experience) and then i sculpt the rest based on my tastes, like a piece of art. Then i squeeze as much juice out of it as possible. So then when im on my deathbed i can say "yeah that came out pretty nicely" and then boom im gone forever.

that's as good as i can do, in my opinion, and i don't intend to waste any time on dreaming about an afterlife. What's the point of it anyway - if you're a good boy you'll get to eat cake in a cloud for an eternity after you're dead? That's anti-life, a vulgar insult to your own existence.

as far as boobs are concerned, that's just entertainment

The afterlife exists whether you want it to or not. Many studies have been done on NDEs. Some of them are near undeniable proof of an afterlife.

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

The afterlife exists whether you want it to or not. Many studies have been done on NDEs. Some of them are near undeniable proof of an afterlife.