New way of tackling teleology, ontology?

[onesteptwostep]

How about instead of having a single individual theorize/fantasize/philosophize/lecture someone on the purpose of life, we have a collective answer to the question? I think this is a new way of trying to set a course for humanity, instead of trying to just haphazardly guess where we're going.

In a way, I think politicians should try to answer this question. It's sort of Plato-esque, (philosopher-king), but I think we we figure this out, then we can collectively prioritize our goals, have a less ambiguous system of morality.

It's basically a missions statement, like a corporation would have, but for humanity as a collective.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Ehhhh.... well I'd first of all take out the word "instead".

Otherwise, if you want some wisdom of the crowd answer, it could be had - should shed light on the motivations of the majority of people.

Obviously you still need the higher minds doing this, and paying homage to the answers already provided in religions/spiritual paths etc.

The bit about politicians is pretty funny though, secret societies etc.

They might say the purpose is these brand new totally effective HAPPY PILLS and VIRTUAL REALITY and then we'll all be plugged into the matrix and used as cosmological batteries, oy vey, etc.

 

[gilliatt]

Like how do you understand Hitler better? You do a complete analysis of his material and formal causes. But the universe is a single interlocking hierarchy of matter and form. Hitler, we go back to his childhood, his social and culture milieu in which his family lived, and there is no end to the acts of Hitler. Its the whole universe interlocking the formed matters. Plato & Aristotle agree that the universe is a relational structure & every element in the universe can be known by transcending that element, related to other elements. Aristotle, there is only one of these worlds, realities. We just cannot get beyond this world. Complete knowledge is probably impossible. knowledge, its the multiple interrelatedness of particulars---formed matters.

 

[gps]

our goals

Good one!
As if?
As if a gradient of goals could be winnowed down to shared goals ... goals one and all could agree upon ... and as if they/we could AGREE on which PROCESSES, which rituals could or would be employed pursuant to furthering these goals?

A prevailing goal is "I MUST be the alpha in this tribe, troupe, political party, Nation, WORLD."
Please share with one and all how THIS variant of `our goal' can be accommodated by two-or-more resonating with this ONE goal?

Our goals!
Ha ha ha. Good one!

I have a goal to shoot on sight anybody (mis)using the collective pronouns `our' , `we' or `they' in conjunction with a verb which only a single human can manifest solo: we/they `think', we/they `believe', we/they share the SAME `goals', etc.

Individuals `think' -- not groups.
Individuals `believe' -- not groups.
Individuals experience personal, unique interwoven sets/collections of `goals'; groups composed of would-be `individuals' invariably manifest evidence that not all are motivated by the same personal goals at the same time.

How, for example, can a group containing members at different levels of Maslow's Pyramid experience the same warm-fuzzy feeling towards the most heart-felt goal of each and every person in said group?