2 ms·
I am willing to defend the parent here. Just because majority follows the urges imposed by their bodies does not automatically mean that everyone does. I person
by A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
I am willing to defend the parent here. Just because majority follows the urges imposed by their bodies does not automatically mean that everyone does. I personally would posit, that it is that very 'skin in the game' that makes humans create and reframe their very existence not only as something worthwhile, but also desirable to the world at large ( and even the universe in general ). In a very real sense, the universe simply cannot cannot care for us. It is not an anthropomorphic entity. It has no feelings, hopes or dreams. After we will inevitably end ( as likely many before us ), it will not change just because of it. It will have just been.
From that perspective, it is hard to argue that is not accurate. And if it is accurate, then positions contrary to it are not accurate and therefore naive.
- civilized 4y agoThe whole idea of measuring the value of different universe states in an objective way seems irrelevant to me. Most people care about surviving because it is subjectively valuable to them. Very few humans shoehorn themselves into a "view from nowhere" and attempt to derive from it some kind of lessons for how humanity should think about itself. It's one way I guess, but there's no reason to prefer it, and it's not popular for obvious reasons.
- piedar 4y agoHumans have feelings, hopes, and dreams. Humans are a subset of the universe. Therefore, the universe has feelings, hopes, and dreams. Now that the universe has manifested we conscious agents of its matter, how dare we squander this gift? Just because it didn't come with an instruction manual? We will find our own purpose.
- laserlight 4y agoDoes the universe enjoy having feelings, hopes, and dreams? This kind of thinking is anthropocentric and doesn't generalize to any scale. Consider cancer cells thinking that their goal (growth) is good for the organism, because, after all, they are part of it.
- piedar 4y agoAs a tiny representative of the universe, yes I do enjoy having feelings, hopes, and dreams. If nihilists find this to be meaningless, perhaps we simply disagree about which of us is the cancer.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y agoIt it is an interesting conversation to me even if it moves into a philosophical realm, where I have little to no experience. Why would we think of ourselves as the representatives of the universe, whereas we are closer to resembling atoms at the scales involved ( and even that seems to embellish our relative size ). Does having feelings, hopes and dreams bestows the status of an envoy? Nihilists do not see things as meaningless, which may carry negative connotations ( 'the cancer part' ). Rather, things are devoid of meaning. Nihilists recognize that meaning is not inherent, but rather ascribed by the person experiencing the feeling. I will admit that I chuckled at the cancer comparison. How does the universe consider, which cells are 'good'?
- piedar 4y agoIf you show a skyscraper to an ant, should he abandon his queen because their little hill is too insignificant to matter? Or should he jump back in and build the best damn nest in the city? I just don't think relative scale is really important - even a galaxy-striding star-snacking titan would grapple with the same problem of meaning. > Nihilists recognize that meaning is not inherent, but rather ascribed by the person experiencing the feeling. That sounds reasonable, so here's an attempt at a synthesis. The universe is huge and mostly empty, but here we have a tiny patch full of life and self-ascribed meaning. Does the universe prefer life? The part that's alive certainly does! So don't let it fall to ashes just to appease the void. I think that's the best answer a mere mortal can give.