Kevin's Watch

And if one is a solipsist...

High Lord Tolkien wrote:I think I'm talking about the anticipation of relief or ending.

And that is indeed a good feeling. But I have come to think it's misguided, because you're anticipating something that doesn't actually happen. It's like believing in Heaven.

Anticipating anything is misguided, for reasons I have already stated. It's really hard to wrap your head around that. But I am trying to.

Fist and Faith wrote:

wayfriend wrote:Sadly, it also means that enjoying life while you're alive is rather pointless. That joy be utterly and completely gone when you die.

Not enjoying life while you're alive is pointless. While you are able to experience anything, why is it better to not be happy than to be happy?

Enjoying life is good. (Is it axiomatic even?) But it does nothing for you once it's over. There's no difference to having been happy and not having been once you are dead. That's all I am saying.

And I believe that has moral ramifications. Although I am not sure what.

Wosbald wrote:It is hard to see how Universal Human Rights, the International Rules-Based Order, Human Fraternity, etc. will be secured in an age where Law is unanchored to float in the Nihil. Would the only option be a raw Power-Politics and the Bellum Omnium Contra Omnes ("the war of all against all")?

Well, you have already pointed out that Law has evolved. It will evolve more.

Did I not also say "And I conclude from this that the only good meaning that there is in this life must be found in what we do for the other people in our lives."

We can evolve a morality of Law that doesn't require divinity.

Avatar wrote:Our impact on the lives of others is both meaningful at an interpersonal level and within our control.

I am not seeing much difference between your opinion and mine, except the part about being selfish is okay. The older I get, the more I feel that this is not true.

E.g. time and resources spent making myself happy are time and resources not spent improving the lives of others.

I am not saying your' wrong. Because I don't really know. I am just saying that I used to believe the same thing but now I question it.

wayfriend wrote:

High Lord Tolkien wrote:I think I'm talking about the anticipation of relief or ending.

And that is indeed a good feeling. But I have come to think it's misguided, because you're anticipating something that doesn't actually happen. It's like believing in Heaven.

Thinking "I will feel relief" isn't the idea. The idea is "I feel relief knowing there will be an end."

Fist and Faith wrote:Thinking "I will feel relief" isn't the idea. The idea is "I feel relief knowing there will be an end."

But there won't be an end. Or, rather, you will never experience it.

There is pain. And then there is non-existence. You cannot experience the end of something if you cannot experience so much as one microsecond of what's past the end. As far as you're concerned, it's forever.

Any relief at the expectation of an end is purely a philosophical fancy.

wayfriend wrote:

Fist and Faith wrote:Thinking "I will feel relief" isn't the idea. The idea is "I feel relief knowing there will be an end."

But there won't be an end. Or, rather, you will never experience it.

There is pain. And then there is non-existence. You cannot experience the end of something if you cannot experience so much as one microsecond of what's past the end. As far as you're concerned, it's forever.

Any relief at the expectation of an end is purely a philosophical fancy.

I love this!
Because I agree with what you're saying and I also agree with what I'm saying.
I think I lack the words to properly explain myself though.

Ha! I am relieved that I did not offend or depress you. Seriously.

I am bending my mind trying to understand this stuff. "No words" is exactly where I started. We lack a language, and we even lack a capacity IMO, to consider non-existence.

wayfriend wrote:

Fist and Faith wrote:Thinking "I will feel relief" isn't the idea. The idea is "I feel relief knowing there will be an end."

But there won't be an end. Or, rather, you will never experience it.

There is pain. And then there is non-existence. You cannot experience the end of something if you cannot experience so much as one microsecond of what's past the end. As far as you're concerned, it's forever.

Any relief at the expectation of an end is purely a philosophical fancy.

Your last sentence is the key. You think that doesn't, or shouldn't, count. But that is how we live. Our emotions define us as surely as our intelligence and consciousness do. We are tops in all three categories. For better or worse, and probably worse, people seem to act on how they feel rather than what they know. But even if letting how we feel dictate our actions is not the best idea, how we feel is the most important aspect of life. If we didn't feel, we would be automatons. What's the point?

Why we feel the ways we do about specific things is often confusing. Sometimes it is a complete mystery. However, I see no reason to look a gift horse in the mouth. If the thought that there will be an end gives you any amount of peace, then take it! There's nothing wrong, or illegitimate, about the peace you feel. There is no list of of objectively correct or allowable reasons to feel happiness or peace. We might want to make a list of objectively incorrect and not allowable reasons, such as those that drive serial murderers. But even if such a list included things that drive people to suicide, feeling peace at the thought that there will be an end does not necessarily mean trying to hasten that end.

I never said "it doesn't count". Nor that feelings don't matter. But I am unpacking it. That's on topic, no?

By saying feeling relief at the thought that there will be an ending is "misguided" and that it "is purely a philosophical fancy," it seemed to me you saw it in a negative way. Sorry for misinterpreting.

Fist and Faith wrote:By saying feeling relief at the thought that there will be an ending is "misguided" and that it "is purely a philosophical fancy," it seemed to me you saw it in a negative way.

"Misguided" is "showing faulty judgement or reasoning" - reasoning being the one applicable here. I think I explained the faulty reasoning as I see it.

Do I feel it is "negative"? Well, in parts yes, in parts no. But I would not go so far as to say it doesn't count.

A man may do many good things because of his belief in an eternal rewards. I don't share that belief, but I wouldn't say his belief is a negative.

Wosbald brings up an important point, maybe at least tangentially, in that irrational beliefs have, to some degree, been a steady influence on civilization. Far from perfect. But one must wonder where we'd have ended up without them. Self-annihilation is a distinct possibility.

South Park wrote:"Look, maybe us Mormons do believe in crazy stories that make absolutely no sense, and maybe Joseph Smith did make it all up. But I have a great life and a great family, and I have the Book of Mormon to thank for that. The truth is, I don't care if Joseph Smith made it all up, because what the church teaches now is loving your family, being nice and helping people. And even though people in this town might think that's stupid, I still choose to believe in it. All I ever did was try to be your friend, Stan. But you're so high and mighty, you couldn't look past my religion and just be my friend back. You've got a lot of growing up to do, buddy. Suck my balls."

I'd say self-annihilation is still a distinct possibility.

I think irrationality in general is a driving force of humanity. Irrational beliefs is too specific.

Irrationality is a lack; there is a driving force which precludes, subsumes, and ultimately defeats rationality. Time and time again.

It seems like two things are being confused here: 1) what matters while you're alive and 2) what matters after you are dead. Enjoying life has been described as both "pointless" and yet also "good (axiomatic, even)." The confusion between the two levels is evident in the exact wording used in the first case: "enjoying life while you're alive is rather pointless." If this enjoyment loses meaning precisely because you'll die--i.e. it means nothing to you after you're gone--how can this possibly have any bearing on whether it's good while you're alive? And I think this contradiction has been noted (without admitting it) by the revision of the original point to its exact opposite in the second case ('good, axiomatic, even.').

But should there really be a division between 1 and 2, morally speaking? That's the main premise here. Sure, things won't matter to YOU after you're gone, but is morality about what matters to YOU? Or to everyone?

I suppose this is nebulously recognized in, "And I conclude from this that the only good meaning that there is in this life must be found in what we do for the other people in our lives." But if this was derived from concluding meaninglessness because of one's own end, what of *their* end? Wouldn't any good you do for them immediately evaporate once they are gone? Why does doing good for them while they are alive matter, despite the fact that they won't know about it once they're gone, if doing good for yourself doesn't matter for precisely the same reason? Oh wait, yes it does: good, axiomatic, even.

It seems this has been one multi-page contradiction.

It's because we don't share definitions closely enough. (Oops, I lost this thread for a while.)

I think the enjoyment is greater because you're going to die. Not to mention more poignant if you think about it.

And the same counts for doing good for that matter.

--A

Fist and Faith wrote:

wayfriend wrote:Sadly, it also means that enjoying life while you're alive is rather pointless. That joy be utterly and completely gone when you die.

Not enjoying life while you're alive is pointless. While you are able to experience anything, why is it better to not be happy than to be happy?

I think the salient purpose of living ~ is to live. How you live is to some degree up to you and dependent upon your circumstances.

As for me ~ it makes sense for me to choose to live as close as possible to our best lives.

For each of us that may mean something different and that’s ok.

I enjoy living, I enjoy this world, I enjoy loving and caring for those I choose to.

Why would anyone not choose happiness.

There are some that experiences crippling depression or have mental health challenges ~ and can’t choose to feel or experience what they don’t. .

But if you are capable of experiencing happiness why wouldn’t that be an objective of living?

I struggle to appreciate any act of altruism ~ as being entirely altruistic because personally I benefit from helping my community in the small ways I do.

I volunteer my time and energy cuz I enjoy the challenge and upsmling benefits me personally. It is physical activity which I also enjoy. The social upside is that others in the community benefit from our shared efforts.

In fact it annoys me that the volunteer organisation I belong to is an agency of the State government ~ and they don’t support volunteers enough or provide sufficient funding.

My point is that the beneficiary of living one’s best life is me.

One’s legacy is less relevant to me but if you are remembered that’s not a bad thing. Better if it’s not cuz you were a serial killer or a blemish on society. lol 😂

How you live us not only of value to you but to your children and your children’s children.

Beyond that I hope we can leave a better world for them than I found it. Clearly not speaking globally but locally.

Happy Easter!

Happy Easter

+JMJ+

Skyweir wrote: ↑

SoulBiter wrote: ↑Happy Easter!

Happy Easter

Backatcha!