3 ms·

And? If there's no point then there's also no point in not enjoying yourself. Sorry, I'm not trying to be flippant. Just pointing out the fact that there is no

And? If there's no point then there's also no point in not enjoying yourself. Sorry, I'm not trying to be flippant. Just pointing out the fact that there is no point to anything is arguably not a very good reason for not making your life the best it can be. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCRZZC-DH7M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCRZZC-DH7M

adventured 7y ago
The parent's comment is entirely wrong. It's not thinking too much, in that specific instance, that is the source of the problem at all. The point (value or reason for) to the things they're claiming have no point, are provided by us, not the universe via magic assignment. That is the source of the mistake. Pretending the value is externally assigned or innate is the source of the premise that there's no point to the big thing (existence, life, work and so on). In the process of being disappointed in the lack of innate value, they're actually mentally assigning low value to the thing in question (which is psychologically the entire point: it's about debasing the value of the thing, it's most likely a revealing indicator about the present state of mind). For example: smart person thinks too much, they realize there's no point to life because we're going to die (or similar setup). The problem with that is, the point of life is decided by the smart person. They're in fact deciding to assign life less or little value in the act of saying there's no point, in that action they are actively determining the point: they're deciding there isn't much of one. They made a choice (with it being understood of course that a person may be in a mental place where for any number of reasons they can't clearly recognize a positive value to existence). The old question: what is the point of life? Does in fact have a very obvious and very simple answer: you decide (which simultaneously does not guarantee good results, even if you decide what it means to you or what the point of your life is to be).
- lanstin 7y ago
  I agree, bearing in mind that to decide is a bit more substantial than just saying it or thinking it - it's an interaction between your thoughts and your actions and everything. I'd say it more as you create your meaning - it might involve things outside of yourself or it might be more individualistic, but it's not arbitrary, and you can have incorrect beliefs about the meaning you are deciding on/creating.
- Karlozkiller 7y ago
  This is where readin satanic texts early on in life really set the tone for me. Summed up they say "There's no point to anything so enjoy life as best you can, while you can". Those texts really focus on you as the supreme master of yourself as opposed to any external entity.
- Noos 7y ago
  And if i decide it's about punching people in the face, in the end it has as much value as your decision for a grand humanitarian crusade, because it's just as much a choice as the other. So we're back to needing a point to judge decisions by. The choice isn't enough, or the fact of choosing isn't enough. This is what creates the "whole life is pointless" reaction in the first place, because "you decide" can mean anything, and there has to be something that isn't solely "you decide" to give particular meaning to one choice over the other.
  - greggman2 7y ago
    If you decide it's about punching peole in the face either you'll wildly succeed or more likely you'll get punched back and eventually locked up by the community at large who are all pursuing their own meanings and have collectively agreed to stop people punch other people in the face. I mean you could choose that the meaning of life is to punch people in the face but you'll have to live with the reprocussions of that choice. That feels like you'll quickly come to the rational decision that it was/is a bad choice.
    - sireat 7y ago
      The problem is that pure rationality leads into abyss. There might be a rational decision not to punch people directly into face but a purely rational psychopath can choose many other profitable avenues that are disastrous to society at large "in the long run" (fentanyl, global warming, etc etc). And we know what happens in the long run. It all goes back to Ecclesiastes(and Job), you can be an "evil" person and prosper in this world. If this tiny lifespan is all there is, this is quite distressing. And physically there is nothing else. Apparently the best solution is to realize there are no rules but live as if they do per Voltaire(not necessarily Pascal).
sk5t 7y ago
Life without purpose is... usually not great. I'm sure there's a more poignant way to put that. An intelligent person may even spot the hedonic treadmill more quickly than the norm.

adventured 7y ago

The parent's comment is entirely wrong. It's not thinking too much, in that specific instance, that is the source of the problem at all. The point (value or reason for) to the things they're claiming have no point, are provided by us, not the universe via magic assignment. That is the source of the mistake. Pretending the value is externally assigned or innate is the source of the premise that there's no point to the big thing (existence, life, work and so on). In the process of being disappointed in the lack of innate value, they're actually mentally assigning low value to the thing in question (which is psychologically the entire point: it's about debasing the value of the thing, it's most likely a revealing indicator about the present state of mind). For example: smart person thinks too much, they realize there's no point to life because we're going to die (or similar setup). The problem with that is, the point of life is decided by the smart person. They're in fact deciding to assign life less or little value in the act of saying there's no point, in that action they are actively determining the point: they're deciding there isn't much of one. They made a choice (with it being understood of course that a person may be in a mental place where for any number of reasons they can't clearly recognize a positive value to existence). The old question: what is the point of life? Does in fact have a very obvious and very simple answer: you decide (which simultaneously does not guarantee good results, even if you decide what it means to you or what the point of your life is to be).

lanstin 7y ago
I agree, bearing in mind that to decide is a bit more substantial than just saying it or thinking it - it's an interaction between your thoughts and your actions and everything. I'd say it more as you create your meaning - it might involve things outside of yourself or it might be more individualistic, but it's not arbitrary, and you can have incorrect beliefs about the meaning you are deciding on/creating.
Karlozkiller 7y ago
This is where readin satanic texts early on in life really set the tone for me. Summed up they say "There's no point to anything so enjoy life as best you can, while you can". Those texts really focus on you as the supreme master of yourself as opposed to any external entity.
Noos 7y ago
And if i decide it's about punching people in the face, in the end it has as much value as your decision for a grand humanitarian crusade, because it's just as much a choice as the other. So we're back to needing a point to judge decisions by. The choice isn't enough, or the fact of choosing isn't enough. This is what creates the "whole life is pointless" reaction in the first place, because "you decide" can mean anything, and there has to be something that isn't solely "you decide" to give particular meaning to one choice over the other.
- greggman2 7y ago
  If you decide it's about punching peole in the face either you'll wildly succeed or more likely you'll get punched back and eventually locked up by the community at large who are all pursuing their own meanings and have collectively agreed to stop people punch other people in the face. I mean you could choose that the meaning of life is to punch people in the face but you'll have to live with the reprocussions of that choice. That feels like you'll quickly come to the rational decision that it was/is a bad choice.
  - sireat 7y ago
    The problem is that pure rationality leads into abyss. There might be a rational decision not to punch people directly into face but a purely rational psychopath can choose many other profitable avenues that are disastrous to society at large "in the long run" (fentanyl, global warming, etc etc). And we know what happens in the long run. It all goes back to Ecclesiastes(and Job), you can be an "evil" person and prosper in this world. If this tiny lifespan is all there is, this is quite distressing. And physically there is nothing else. Apparently the best solution is to realize there are no rules but live as if they do per Voltaire(not necessarily Pascal).

sk5t 7y ago

Life without purpose is... usually not great. I'm sure there's a more poignant way to put that. An intelligent person may even spot the hedonic treadmill more quickly than the norm.