Originally posted by Grampy Bobby "... there" or here or somewhere else or nowhere at all if this moment is a dream and we're all trying to get back home?
Is the concept of "being there" too difficult for you to grasp?
Originally posted by HandyAndy Is the concept of "being there" too difficult for you to grasp?
Hey, an open mind examines the width and height and depth of the concept being scrutinized at the moment by conscious entities without premise or prescription or predilection for its outcome. Who knows, Red Hot Pawn may be a dream within a dream which our subconscious minds populate with players on a brief stage before Russ says, "Out, out, brief candle..."
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby "I did a malapro by saying "non-secular" because I thing Bobby suggested a secular analysis of the questions."
... secular or non-secular mindset: which is generally philosophically appropriate? I would have thought secular.
Also, which specific "routine mode of analysis" do you reference?
I thought yu offered to embark on a secular philosophical analysis of the question of the meaning and purpose of life, which included their "absolute" sense.
One suggestion so far is, the m and p of life is pretty much what you make of it.
We haven't quite gotten to the issue of absoluteness of this m/p.
Do you agree that we are trying to stay on the secular side of this?
Originally posted by JS357 I thought yu offered to embark on a secular philosophical analysis of the question of the meaning and purpose of life, which included their "absolute" sense.
One suggestion so far is, the m and p of life is pretty much what you make of it.
We haven't quite gotten to the issue of absoluteness of this m/p.
Do you agree that we are trying to stay on the secular side of this?
Of course "secular" or I'm going to take my OP and go home. lol
The initial question was simply intended to get things moving.
Postscript: What would philosophy do if there were no hypothetical questions?
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby Of course "secular" or I'm going to take my OP and go home. lol
The initial question was simply intended to get things moving.
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby ... states of bodily awareness when the entity is awake and alert?
When the entity is conscious. I think life, or anything else may have meaning/purpose in my dreams. But if I am totally unconscious and not dreaming, then for that period, no meaning/purpose exists for me.
And the meaning/purpose may change over time.
Originally posted by twhitehead When the entity is conscious. I think life, or anything else may have meaning/purpose in my dreams. But if I am totally unconscious and not dreaming, then for that period, no meaning/purpose exists for me.
And the meaning/purpose may change over time.
"But if I am totally unconscious and not dreaming, then for that period, no meaning/purpose exists for me." -twhitehead
Is the "meaning/purpose" relegated to an unexplained state of suspension or involuntary abeyance during those intervals of being "totally unconscious and not dreaming"? And are there gradations of dreaming with or without recall?
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby Is the "meaning/purpose" relegated to an unexplained state of suspension or involuntary abeyance during those intervals of being "totally unconscious and not dreaming"? And are there gradations of dreaming with or without recall?
I am not particularly interested in going into the details. Suffice it to say that 'meaning/purpose' is simply a reference to the importance/use of something to a conscious entity. How the exact thought process of the conscious entity work are not really relevant.
Originally posted by twhitehead I am not particularly interested in going into the details. Suffice it to say that 'meaning/purpose' is simply a reference to the importance/use of something to a conscious entity. How the exact thought process of the conscious entity work are not really relevant.
"Suffice it to say that 'meaning/purpose' is simply a reference to the importance/use of something to a conscious entity." -twhitehead
That's it? Hmm... perhaps minimal is the coin of the philosophical realm. Thanks for the reduction.
Originally posted by twhitehead See my first post in the thread.
OK. I don't have the notion that everyone's life has an "ultimate" meaning or purpose, but some people seem to, for example a guy just died who dedicated his life to sidewalk stargazing. He found a way to make telescopes from inexpensive materials, didn't patent it, lived on the kindness of friends, taught and conducted sidewalk astronomy classes and excursions, etc. So it is possible to have such a m/p, but it's not something we necessarily "should" have or "should" seek to find. it just happens to some people and not others, and a decent life can be had either way.
Originally posted by twhitehead I find morality to be a very interesting topic. Also free will is interesting. But I recently discovered Sam Harris and believe that it would be hard to add to what he has to say on the two subjects.
Listening to Harris speak on the illusion of free will makes one wonder how he ever graduated high school, let alone UCLA.
What he uses as logic is a hot mess.
"Closest thing to a philosophy forum..."
02 Feb '14 02:091 edit
Back to Top