Why live?
Not too long ago one of my best friends, Jonathan Fenn, had a so-called epiphany. Out of nowhere, he said that the world doesn't matter and that nothing we do in this world matters because feelings of pleasure and pain are illusions. He asked a lot of very hypothetical questions wherein the entire world could be a part of a matrix or someone's imagination (or something to that extent) and nothing we did had any consequence or relevance because in the end we were all just going to die. Basically, it meant that our actions had no consequence and we were free to do as we wanted and nothing would matter because eventually we would just die. This renders life on Earth completely meaningless and full of deceit and illusion. I knew, as soon as I read his blog that I had to go talk to him to make sure that I was understanding him correctly and that he wasn't experiencing a severe mental breakdown. Immediately I felt like what he was saying was completely absurd and it needed to be clarified and discussed.
I think at one point in life everyone goes through this same kind of epiphany. However, it's important that in the end you draw the correct conclusion from it, because the concept that "nothing we do matters" and "nobody has feelings" is the type of methodology that murderers and insane criminals use. This isn't to say that there is a "right" and "wrong" way to think and perhaps the epiphany does have a hint of truth behind it, but I think we can all agree that living in a world where nobody has feelings and where nothing matters would be chaotic. Sounds to me like something out of the Book of Revelation, and we all know how that ended.
After a long debate, we've come to the conclusion that the world does in fact matter and it matters very much what we do and what we feel. Which gave me a sense of relief to know that I was able to talk some sense into him (although I think for the most part he talked the sense into himself). What we did was we laid out a very simple solution to the actions each person takes and then we were able to see that everything that comes before the action and everything that follows the action has a huge impact on the person doing the action and on the people that are around.
Click the image to see it full-scale:
We drew up a mental diagram, that in my head looked something like this (Fig. 1)
In this we can see that a person's actions really follow through 4 chronological steps: influences, characteristics, actions and results. The cycle then repeats indefinitely and grows in numbers of influences and in numbers of choices we have (possible actions).
It begins with an influence, which can be God, school, the science of evolution, your parents or any number of other things. You educate yourself, or get taught something, then this influence generates a certain feeling inside of you. It could be emotional, or it could be a simple characteristic. For instance, God could be an influence that would result in you obtaining the characteristic that says that you are defined by The 10 Commandments which say that you shouldn't kill. This then results in a series of choices. It means that you, as an individual, when presented with a situation, have several choices to choose from. Simply put, one could be to kill and the other could be to spare someone's life. Your characteristic (the one that was influenced by God) would then probably reason you to choose the path that would spare the individual (although this is another religious subject about God's mercy that can be discussed at a later time). This action then produces a result. In this case, you let the person live and don't kill them. So we've gone from an influence to a result via a decision in which choice we make. In Fig. 1, the example shows the influences contrasting between several choices and eventually resulting to a decision and the choice to ignore or put aside one of your influences for that particular action.
Sounds very simple, doesn't it? Well, for some reason it took us several hours to agree on this (and even still we have very opposing views when it comes to more detailed interpretations of this idea). And something that looks like common sense to me, seemed very confusing to my friend. However, you can see in Fig. 1 that certain influences will conflict with others. This is precisely what gives you the illusion of free will and choice. You must choose between going to school and not going to school. And in life you end up making a lot of choices. In this case, you simply choose to abandon one of your influences and choose to take the actions proposed by that particular influence. However, over time, when you are faced with a new decision, your original influences will still be there and you will again have to choose which one to abandon and which one to follow.
Of course it's never just that simple. It's almost never a simple choice between two things. There isn't just a wrong and a right way to do something. There is an infinite number of choices neither of which are more wrong or more right than the other. However certain ones will generate a greater number of positive results. Others will generate a lot of very negative results that will not be of much help to you or others. However, to say that there is a generic right and wrong way to do something (with a few options in between, or not) is incorrect.
So what does all of this have to do with living? Does the world matter? Is it important that we are alive? Certainly. Because if we can act and influence our environment and others through our actions, that means that there is a purpose for us being alive. Now some believe that this purpose is predefined by God, or a destiny of some sort, but I don't buy into that. I believe that the purpose is individual and could be as simple as just waking up the next day and eating breakfast. That sounds like a very reasonable and achievable purpose to me, even if it is very short-term.
Eventually of course, you end up wondering what your glabal purpose in life is. And most of the time people will either bring up religion, or some other fundamental belief system. Others will simply say that there is no ultimate purpose. And others don't know and don't really care as long as they can survive. Well, again, I really don't think that it's that complicated. For me, the global purpose is to live until the next day (it goes well with my need for food, water, and air), and learn as much as I can about our world and in that progress the human race as a whole. Now it seems like a very vague purpose, but in fact it's not. It defines very specifically what I have to do throughout my life. What it doesn't do is define specifically each of my daily tasks. This gives me a lot of room to explore and learn in my every day activities.
What's great about my individual purpose is that even if there is an "ultimate" purpose in life that was predefined by some deity, or even if there is a god, the fact that I'm doing my part in progressing the human race means that eventually we might get smart enough, or build sufficient technology to realize this "ultimate" purpose, or an "ultimate" being. So far, however, there is no reason for me to believe in their existence, so I don't have any tendency to follow them. I don't like walking around blind, or in blind faith (and with good reason). If some ultimate deities exist, then one day we will probably be sure of it, but until then, all evidence points to a world where secular humanism makes the most sense and will provide the most benefits and success. There is currently no evidence to show that a deity cannot be exposed and there is no evidence to show that a deity currently exists (more on this in future journals).
I think at one point in life everyone goes through this same kind of epiphany. However, it's important that in the end you draw the correct conclusion from it, because the concept that "nothing we do matters" and "nobody has feelings" is the type of methodology that murderers and insane criminals use. This isn't to say that there is a "right" and "wrong" way to think and perhaps the epiphany does have a hint of truth behind it, but I think we can all agree that living in a world where nobody has feelings and where nothing matters would be chaotic. Sounds to me like something out of the Book of Revelation, and we all know how that ended.
After a long debate, we've come to the conclusion that the world does in fact matter and it matters very much what we do and what we feel. Which gave me a sense of relief to know that I was able to talk some sense into him (although I think for the most part he talked the sense into himself). What we did was we laid out a very simple solution to the actions each person takes and then we were able to see that everything that comes before the action and everything that follows the action has a huge impact on the person doing the action and on the people that are around.
Click the image to see it full-scale:
We drew up a mental diagram, that in my head looked something like this (Fig. 1)
In this we can see that a person's actions really follow through 4 chronological steps: influences, characteristics, actions and results. The cycle then repeats indefinitely and grows in numbers of influences and in numbers of choices we have (possible actions).
It begins with an influence, which can be God, school, the science of evolution, your parents or any number of other things. You educate yourself, or get taught something, then this influence generates a certain feeling inside of you. It could be emotional, or it could be a simple characteristic. For instance, God could be an influence that would result in you obtaining the characteristic that says that you are defined by The 10 Commandments which say that you shouldn't kill. This then results in a series of choices. It means that you, as an individual, when presented with a situation, have several choices to choose from. Simply put, one could be to kill and the other could be to spare someone's life. Your characteristic (the one that was influenced by God) would then probably reason you to choose the path that would spare the individual (although this is another religious subject about God's mercy that can be discussed at a later time). This action then produces a result. In this case, you let the person live and don't kill them. So we've gone from an influence to a result via a decision in which choice we make. In Fig. 1, the example shows the influences contrasting between several choices and eventually resulting to a decision and the choice to ignore or put aside one of your influences for that particular action.
Sounds very simple, doesn't it? Well, for some reason it took us several hours to agree on this (and even still we have very opposing views when it comes to more detailed interpretations of this idea). And something that looks like common sense to me, seemed very confusing to my friend. However, you can see in Fig. 1 that certain influences will conflict with others. This is precisely what gives you the illusion of free will and choice. You must choose between going to school and not going to school. And in life you end up making a lot of choices. In this case, you simply choose to abandon one of your influences and choose to take the actions proposed by that particular influence. However, over time, when you are faced with a new decision, your original influences will still be there and you will again have to choose which one to abandon and which one to follow.
Of course it's never just that simple. It's almost never a simple choice between two things. There isn't just a wrong and a right way to do something. There is an infinite number of choices neither of which are more wrong or more right than the other. However certain ones will generate a greater number of positive results. Others will generate a lot of very negative results that will not be of much help to you or others. However, to say that there is a generic right and wrong way to do something (with a few options in between, or not) is incorrect.
So what does all of this have to do with living? Does the world matter? Is it important that we are alive? Certainly. Because if we can act and influence our environment and others through our actions, that means that there is a purpose for us being alive. Now some believe that this purpose is predefined by God, or a destiny of some sort, but I don't buy into that. I believe that the purpose is individual and could be as simple as just waking up the next day and eating breakfast. That sounds like a very reasonable and achievable purpose to me, even if it is very short-term.
Eventually of course, you end up wondering what your glabal purpose in life is. And most of the time people will either bring up religion, or some other fundamental belief system. Others will simply say that there is no ultimate purpose. And others don't know and don't really care as long as they can survive. Well, again, I really don't think that it's that complicated. For me, the global purpose is to live until the next day (it goes well with my need for food, water, and air), and learn as much as I can about our world and in that progress the human race as a whole. Now it seems like a very vague purpose, but in fact it's not. It defines very specifically what I have to do throughout my life. What it doesn't do is define specifically each of my daily tasks. This gives me a lot of room to explore and learn in my every day activities.
What's great about my individual purpose is that even if there is an "ultimate" purpose in life that was predefined by some deity, or even if there is a god, the fact that I'm doing my part in progressing the human race means that eventually we might get smart enough, or build sufficient technology to realize this "ultimate" purpose, or an "ultimate" being. So far, however, there is no reason for me to believe in their existence, so I don't have any tendency to follow them. I don't like walking around blind, or in blind faith (and with good reason). If some ultimate deities exist, then one day we will probably be sure of it, but until then, all evidence points to a world where secular humanism makes the most sense and will provide the most benefits and success. There is currently no evidence to show that a deity cannot be exposed and there is no evidence to show that a deity currently exists (more on this in future journals).
Labels: action, characteristics, consequence, god, influence, life, result, revelation, school, secular humanism, why
posted by Evgueni Naverniouk | 7:54 PM
1 Comments:
Ah, the good old question. "What is the purpose of life?"
Life would be too boring if there was a purpose. If the purpose were to eat as much candy as possible, for example, it would be very easy to decide who the better person was. After you die, we weigh the amount of candy you've eaten, and if your stash is bigger than Bob's, then you're a better person than Bob. Simple. Boring.
In reality, it's a lot more interesting than that. At a certain point, when you reach that age when you ask yourself that question, "Why am I here?", that's when it gets interesting. No one can answer it for you. No one can tell you what your purpose is - that would be cheating. The game is to come up with one for yourself and then strive to achieve it.
If someone is trying to tell you what your purpose should be, chances are, they are trying to sell you something. Tell 'em to go to hell (politely) and think for yourself.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home