Philosophy and time

[V.I]

I just read the text shown below, and couldn't help but think about time. Humans spend such a short amount of it on this Earth, and a very small minority of us ever wonder as to what our purpose or place is. Do we even have one?

My own view is that we don't, we're simply here to spend our lives doing what we please. Sure enough, there may be some divine being out there, but if there is he would want us to enjoy ourselves and not be 'held back' by things: he would want us to experience life at its fullest. However, that does not mean that murder, and other crimes akin to it, are acceptable.

All truth be told, I'm not even sure that the meaning of life, if you will, is actually worth pondering over. As I stated, we spend an extremely short amount of time on Earth, why waste it (like many people already have) wondering and pondering the meaning of our existence? A lot of lives have already been lost to this exact cause. Anyway, enough of my talk, what'd you guys think?

If you are reading this then this warning is for you. Every word you read of this useless fine print is another second off your life. Don't you have other things to do? Is your life so empty that you honestly can't think of a better way to spend these moments?

Or are you so impressed with authority that you give respect and credence to all who claim it? Do you read everything you're supposed to read? Do you think everything you're supposed to think? Buy what you're told you should want? Get out of your apartment, meet a member of the opposite sex. Stop the excessive masturbation. Quit your job. Start a fight. Prove you're alive. If you don't claim your humanity you will become a statistic. You have been warned. - [Insert Authors Name Here]

 

[Velmarshal]

That quote is old, very old.
And by the way, what girl would want to have sex 7 times a day?

Oh and another thing, what's the topic?

 

[TheDivineBoss]

I'll help you:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085959/

 

[Elenai]

The only wasted life, is the one that is spent selfishly.

 

[Steel_Stallion]

The only wasted life, is the one that is spent selfishly.

Hahahaha, good one.

 

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Right.

See, going out and meeting someone of the opposite sex (or anyone, actually) would be a waste of time for me.

 

[DocDude]

If life as no purpose, like many atheists believe, then what you do with your life dosnt matter. once you die you lose your consciouness. you dont hear, see, think or feel. in death all people are equel whatever they got laid every day of the week, had the most seccsesful career ever, climbed mountens, hunted mammoths, been the stronges warrior in the world or died as lonly virgens, died as baybes or little children in a car accident.
and also all the shit in the world dosnt matter, so maurder rape and make people suffer as much as you like.
(but people are human so they dont do it)

if there is some divine etintity up there that controls what happens when we die (and even when we live) there is no way to know what it wants us to do.
people can be the most pure and thight cristhens, jews or arabs, only to die and discover that some tribel african realigion in the middle of nowhere was right all along.

in "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" its written in one point "the chances that you'll learn the meaning of life is so small that insted of searching for it you just better get yourself busy".

 

[TheDivineBoss]

If life as no purpose, like many atheists believe, then what you do with your life dosnt matter. once you die you lose your consciouness. you dont hear, see, think or feel. in death all people are equel whatever they got laid every day of the week, had the most seccsesful career ever, climbed mountens, hunted mammoths, been the stronges warrior in the world or died as lonly virgens, died as baybes or little children in a car accident.
and also all the shit in the world dosnt matter, so maurder rape and make people suffer as much as you like.
(but people are human so they dont do it)

if there is some divine etintity up there that controls what happens when we die (and even when we live) there is no way to know what it wants us to do.
people can be the most pure and thight cristhens, jews or arabs, only to die and discover that some tribel african realigion in the middle of nowhere was right all along.

in "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" its written in one point "the chances that you'll learn the meaning of life is so small that insted of searching for it you just better get yourself busy".

If I die, I would like to have my own 'personal space' or dimension.

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

If life as no purpose, like many atheists believe, then what you do with your life dosnt matter. once you die you lose your consciouness. you dont hear, see, think or feel. in death all people are equel whatever they got laid every day of the week, had the most seccsesful career ever, climbed mountens, hunted mammoths, been the stronges warrior in the world or died as lonly virgens, died as baybes or little children in a car accident.
and also all the shit in the world dosnt matter, so maurder rape and make people suffer as much as you like.
(but people are human so they dont do it)

One thing's true: We really don't give a shit about anything that won't make us enjoy ourselves more. But that doesn't mean we don't do things for other people. People are perfectly capable of doing good things without some kind of transcendental meaning to life.

if there is some divine etintity up there that controls what happens when we die (and even when we live) there is no way to know what it wants us to do.
people can be the most pure and thight cristhens, jews or arabs, only to die and discover that some tribel african realigion in the middle of nowhere was right all along.

It's a test of faith...for every religion, apparently. Except for those Rastafarians, who believe in Haile Selassie, whose existence in this world has long been proven and recorded. Now all they need to do is prove his godliness.

in "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" its written in one point "the chances that you'll learn the meaning of life is so small that insted of searching for it you just better get yourself busy".

The meaning of life is to enjoy.



That wasn't so hard.

 

[DocDude]

everything people do they do becouse it makes them feel good/less bad now or in the future. as part of being humen, helping other people makes us feel good. that simple.

yep, its a test of faith.

becouse of the lack of knowladge of the real meaning of life people have made their own meaning: to enjoy it. its pretty lame to say it if you ask me XD

 

[The_wand_mirror]

If I die, I would like to have my own 'personal space' or dimension.

lol yeah...

Maybe this life is worth nothing and everything starts after death... we probably never know though.

Personally i think that living beings don't have a soul, everything has just been made up and accepted by people that want to be comforted with their loved one's going to heaven or having a purpose to serve your whole life.

You can do whatever you want, but you can't do just anything afterall when you're born human you are bound to be part of society and some people are just not made for just anything.

 

[DocDude]

what is "Soul"? i dont think that soul has to do something with the afterlife

you can ask yourself why is it that you are you? why do you see through the eyes you see and not through other? why is it that you feel and think and exist? and how come this world is existing in such harmony and balance?

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

everything people do they do becouse it makes them feel good/less bad now or in the future. as part of being humen, helping other people makes us feel good. that simple.

Yep.

yep, its a test of faith.

Yep.

becouse of the lack of knowladge of the real meaning of life people have made their own meaning: to enjoy it. its pretty lame to say it if you ask me XD

It's not some kind of fake alternative meaning to life. Somewhere, somehow, the necessary elements to form the conscious organism that is me have come together, and I intend to make the most of it.

 

[Gilles]

Sure enough, there may be some divine being out there, but if there is he would want us to enjoy ourselves and not be 'held back' by things: he would want us to experience life at its fullest.

I totally agree, however I think to enjoy life to its fullest, is to do God's will. I think the saints were probably some of the happiest, most content people, and I believe there's a good reason.

 

[En_Fuego]

If you are reading this then this warning is for you. Every word you read of this useless fine print is another second off your life. Don't you have other things to do? Is your life so empty that you honestly can't think of a better way to spend these moments?

Or are you so impressed with authority that you give respect and credence to all who claim it? Do you read everything you're supposed to read? Do you think everything you're supposed to think? Buy what you're told you should want? Get out of your apartment, meet a member of the opposite sex. Stop the excessive masturbation. Quit your job. Start a fight. Prove you're alive. If you don't claim your humanity you will become a statistic. You have been warned. - [Insert Authors Name Here]

No deal.

 

[DocDude]

i think that all the indian gurus and all the budahizem and monks are the happiest, and im pretty sure they are getting somewhere.

and maybe the gods just gave us dicks so we will resist using them with our power of faith?
maybe they gave us these bodies to understand they dont really matter?

think about this shit.

say that i die today. maybe some people will remember me, then they'll die and even my memory is gone
lets tallk about bigger people, the shit-men say that becouse they are rememberd they live forever. sure people remember them now, but someday humenty will end and thats it XD

 

[LordDz]

and maybe the gods just gave us dicks so we will resist using them with our power of faith?

Resist using our dicks, what are you on?

 

[Elenai]

God said "Be fruitful and multiply"

He just said be married first so you don't get diseases, and illegitimate children trying to be gold diggers (cultural thing especially)

IE: God says this:

"Once the rings are on the finger...knock yourselves out...literally, I gave you pleasure senses for a reason...and imaginative brains. USE THEM!"

Buddist Monks, and such...tend to be celibate...and bald...and tend to own a bowl...and that's about it. It isn't so much that they are 'happy' as it is that they are simply stoic. (that's my observation anyway)

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

Buddist Monks, and such...tend to be celibate...and bald...and tend to own a bowl...and that's about it. It isn't so much that they are 'happy' as it is that they are simply stoic. (that's my observation anyway)

As Bob Dylan once put in song, don't criticize what you can't understand. Christians are, if anything, the polar opposite of Buddhists. Buddhists seek to escape the constant cycle of life, or Nirvana, whereas Christians are looking for immortality and gaining access to Heaven. Modern age people have bombarded themselves with so many sights, sounds, and needless obligations, that we've never even stopped to recognize the tranquility of living a humble lifestyle. For all we know, Buddhists are miles happier than us violent, greedy cyborgs with unshaven heads.

 

[BlargHonk]

The meaning of life: Reproduce

That is it, that is the only thing that life is mean't to do.

And most of the technology we have produced is to enable more reproduction.

 

[Elenai]

I wasn't criticizing, I was making an observation. Not entirely accurate, but an observation none the less.

 

[DocDude]

everything we talk about in this thread is opinions and faith. i know very well the jewish and christen god and what he said, but that's just a religion and a matter of faith.

sex is a thing that is just so much bigger then us. animals just fuck around all day long with who ever they want, and i dont think they get to much deasises out of it (and even if they do they make enough offsprings to makeup for it).

all the christen monks, priests and nuns, the ones who are not allowed to get married or have sex, what about them?

buddahists go thourgh many understandings, practices and maditates that just allow them to be happy with a bowl of rice then you will ever be with all your technolegy and meatiral stuff. most people just can't understand this concept, and not many can take it on themselvs becouse its entirly changes your life.
they alweys talk about enlightenment becouse its something you need to find out yourself and be willing to live it. the ones who does it are happy beyond any metiral thing can ever make you happy.

 

[V.I]

I totally agree, however I think to enjoy life to its fullest, is to do God's will. I think the saints were probably some of the happiest, most content people, and I believe there's a good reason.

I couldn't agree more, actually -- with the premise of the statement, that is. You believe that doing 'God's will' brings satisfaction, thus you do it. Someone else believes in doing X in order to bring about satisfaction, so they do it.

You do everything for pleasure, regardless of faith or religion: everything we do as humans somehow links to back to the concept of 'pleasure'.

EDIT:

i know very well the jewish and christen god

Wasn't he the same person?

Buddist Monks, and such...tend to be celibate...and bald...and tend to own a bowl...and that's about it. It isn't so much that they are 'happy' as it is that they are simply stoic. (that's my observation anyway)

But, by having only the very simplest of things in life, they are happy. It brings them pleasure, and they don't get caught up in the small details of things.

 

[DocDude]

the jewish and christen god is the same one, that's why i written the sentence that way.

as i sayed before, its all about faith. some people may think that "God's Will" so to make you suffer and sacrifce to show him he is more importent then you or other "weird" things and ways to do his will.

when your happiness is effected by metirail things everything can make you less happy.

 

[Elenai]

On a different note: How many Buddhist monks would willingly destroy their bowl, if you asked them to?

 

[DocDude]

what does destroying the bowl proofs?

 

[Gilles]

I couldn't agree more, actually -- with the premise of the statement, that is. You believe that doing 'God's will' brings satisfaction, thus you do it. Someone else believes in doing X in order to bring about satisfaction, so they do it.

You do everything for pleasure, regardless of faith or religion: everything we do as humans somehow links to back to the concept of 'pleasure'.

No, they/I do it for God. It doesn't always bring pleasure, in fact it's far harder to follow God. However it can bring great joy, but however good that is, it's never easy, and that joy isn't what pushes me/others to do it. I phrased that previous sentence wrong. I should have said many saints led joyous lives, even through the pain and suffering.

However some of the saints weren't happy and content. They struggled in their faith, and had horrible lives. However they continued to do God's will.

Though, I would agree that it's quite possible the satisfaction merely comes from the thought of doing what you think is right.

 

[FamousPker49]

Elenai, I believe this is how your logic works.

On another note, humans are all selfish. They wish to fufill their own pleasure from however they seem to find it. Since when are others trying to get people into Heaven? Sure priests and those people that come knocking on your door 'seem' to be doing that, but this is only to 'ensure' their own spot in Heaven. I don't blame them. If their was a magical afterlife gigantic party I would work my ass off to get invited too.

But I do not necessarily believe in God. I believe in the teachings or the basic premises of religion and that's to do what's right and be a good person. I don't necessarily find pleasure in doing so, often times it pisses me off. I suppose deep down I do find pleasure in it, but I just stand up for my own moral integrity and beliefs, not for anyone else's.

But in the end I feel like we are all pointless except for our nominal contribution to keeping the human race alive one more generation and tempting to bring about a giant imbalance to nature's equilibrium and effectively destroy ourselves as a race. Not sure where I got off track but that is all.

 

[Gilles]

I totally disagree Pker. Humans are capable of selfless acts, unlike all other animals.

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

I totally disagree Pker. Humans are capable of selfless acts, unlike all other animals.

Describe one of these selfless acts.

 

[FamousPker49]

Sure we are capable of many things, has one ever happened? More than likely no. To be selfless, their had to be no ulterior motive, like.... Hey I want to be a hero, or what will people say if I choose not to save them? As some examples. We can never really prove they were selfless or not because we cannot read each others thoughts. Give me some points and I shall counter them easily and willingly.

 

[Gilles]

Describe one of these selfless acts.

Putting yourself in danger to save someone else.

Sure we are capable of many things, has one ever happened? More than likely no. To be selfless, their had to be no ulterior motive, like.... Hey I want to be a hero, or what will people say if I choose not to save them? As some examples. We can never really prove they were selfless or not because we cannot read each others thoughts. Give me some points and I shall counter them easily and willingly.

Sure those could be motives, but is not possible to love someone and choose to sacrifice yourself entirely for their sake? I'd say so. Of course it can't be proven, neither side can; so if you want to believe humans only strive to benefit themselves, go ahead.

 

[Diehard@Azeroth]

I have been a "silent philosopher" all my life. Here is what i have to say, no its not a quote or anything, but the main purpose in life is to feel happy. Have you ever wondered why we do good? do you think its just to make yourself a nicer place in heaven, or is it to shape your life to the better? Many people fail to realize this goal of life, many seek authority, many seek pride, but the truth is, all of these lead to happiness, as long as they are balanced. Sometimes one does not have much pride or anything else, but what he has is the realization of being happy, the driving force that of which causes one to try to become happy even though he has went through alot. So the main purpose of life is happiness, society has set many "double-standards", some of which are to make us more happy, but others which are a result of ignorance. Complete happiness cannot be achieved in this life, but one can always try to achieve happiness to increase his or hers from within.

Hope i helped
Yours sincerely, Diehard@Azeroth

 

[The_wand_mirror]

what is "Soul"? i dont think that soul has to do something with the afterlife

you can ask yourself why is it that you are you? why do you see through the eyes you see and not through other? why is it that you feel and think and exist? and how come this world is existing in such harmony and balance?

I think the concept of a soul was ment to hold our emotions/intelligence (anything complicated like that) and ability to live or something like that, but we are just a bunch of flesh, blood and bones assembled by nature and evolved into what we are now.

 

[D4RK_G4ND4LF]

I totally disagree Pker. Humans are capable of selfless acts, unlike all other animals.

monkeys pick lice eggs from other monkeys hair regardless of their own time they could spend with getting food/fucking/whatever

and that's my idea:
develop so imba technology that there is no need for people in the future to do any painful stuff like working to get money to buy food and so on
after that there is enough time for everybody to understand how brains realy work and make some perfect simulation helmet for everyone which makes them think they could do whatever they want
(well...after I am reading that this is pretty much like matrix x)

of cause there should be some mechanism to make as much humans as it is possible to feed to make the maximum amount of humans feel the maximum amount of pleasure

when the sun blows off there shoud be some space shuttle to bring humanity to some other planet of cause

so we have lots of very happy humans
kinda stupid race but that's the "best" thing to do for them

did I forget anything?

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

Putting yourself in danger to save someone else.

You're still doing it for self-satisfaction. You do it because it's what you consider a good deed. Because saving that person will make you feel better about yourself.

Sure those could be motives, but is not possible to love someone and choose to sacrifice yourself entirely for their sake?

No. There's a motive, and it always comes back to yourself.

I'd say so. Of course it can't be proven, neither side can; so if you want to believe humans only strive to benefit themselves, go ahead.

And I will. There's nothing wrong with doing good deeds to satisfy your own desires. It simply means you have a deeply rooted desire for benevolence. It's a good thing. It doesn't make your compassion or martyrdom worth any less.

---

On a different note: How many Buddhist monks would willingly destroy their bowl, if you asked them to?

Reminds me of a Zen Koan I've heard before.

Ryokan, a Zen master, lived the simplest kind of life in a little hut at the foot of a mountain. One evening a thief visited the hut only to discover there was nothing to steal.

Ryokan returned and caught him. "You have come a long way to visit me," he told the prowler, "and you should not return empty-handed. Please take my clothes as a gift."

The thief was bewildered. He took the clothes and slunk away.

Ryoken sat naked, watching the moon. "Poor fellow," he mused, "I wish I could have given him this beautiful moon."

 

[Gilles]

You're still doing it for self-satisfaction. You do it because it's what you consider a good deed. Because saving that person will make you feel better about yourself.

No, feeling better is simply an effect, not the cause. What if there was someone trapped inside a car accident, and a passerby runs in without thinking, and rips off the door and saves the person. They didn't think about how they'd feel, or if they'd become a hero, they simply reacted. Why?

No. There's a motive, and it always comes back to yourself.

No.

And I will. There's nothing wrong with doing good deeds to satisfy your own desires. It simply means you have a deeply rooted desire for benevolence. It's a good thing. It doesn't make your compassion or martyrdom worth any less.

I believe that desire for benevolence is often selfless.

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

No, feeling better is simply an effect, not the cause. What if there was someone trapped inside a car accident, and a passerby runs in without thinking, and rips off the door and saves the person. They didn't think about how they'd feel, or if they'd become a hero, they simply reacted. Why?

Let's use your highly questionable scenario (I seriously doubt that becoming a hero wasn't running through their minds). The person may or may not have been consciously aware of it, but they did it because they felt it was the right thing to do, and it would be emotionally rewarding to set things straight. They also didn't want to feel the guilt that would come with idly standing by when the opportunity to save a life was so close. These two make up what could be considered "self-satisfaction."

No.

Peanut Butter.

I believe that desire for benevolence is often selfless.

You are seeking to fulfill that desire. That's not selfless at all.

What drives us to eat is hunger. What drives us to entertain ourselves is boredom. What drives us to adhere to our morals is self-reflection.

 

[Gilles]

Let's use your highly questionable scenario (I seriously doubt that becoming a hero wasn't running through their minds). The person may or may not have been consciously aware of it, but they did it because they felt it was the right thing to do, and it would be emotionally rewarding to set things straight. They also didn't want to feel the guilt that would come with idly standing by when the opportunity to save a life was so close. These two make up what could be considered "self-satisfaction."

You are seeking to fulfill that desire. That's not selfless at all.

What drives us to eat is hunger. What drives us to entertain ourselves is boredom. What drives us to adhere to our morals is self-reflection.

Just because something drives us to do good, does not mean the act is selfish.

Selfless-
"having little or no concern for oneself, esp. with regard to fame, position, money, etc.; unselfish."

I'd say that people are more than capable of doing selfless acts, even if they are motivated by something. We have to be motivated by something, be it a reward, or an inner desire to do good.

 

[Steel_Stallion]

Just because something drives us to do good, does not mean the act is selfish.

Selfless-
"having little or no concern for oneself, esp. with regard to fame, position, money, etc.; unselfish."

I'd say that people are more than capable of doing selfless acts, even if they are motivated by something. We have to be motivated by something, be it a reward, or an inner desire to do good.

If you follow the thread, you'll eventually have a reason in which you wanted to benefit yourself in some way or the other. All acts can be concluded as selfish in some way or the other, really.

There's nothing you do selflessly, because everything you do, you do to benefit yourself in some way or the other.

 

[Devine]

The meaning of life is to catch the cursor in steelstallion's signature.

 

[V.I]

It's interesting that somebody mentioned that the drive to do good comes from selfishness.

Piliavin, Irving., Rodin, Judith., & Piliavin, Jane, way back in 1969, preformed a psychology experiment known as 'Good Samaritanism: An Underground Phenomenon?' after becoming interested in the brutal murder of Kitty Genovese in New York in 1964. The murder had attracted interest from psychologists because not one person out of the 40 people, who witnessed the attack lasting over half an hour, tried to help or contact the police.

These psychologists theorised that this was due to either Diffusion of Responsibility or Pluralistic Ignorance [1] and thus many lab experiments were conducted to test these hypothesis'. However, Piliavin et al recognised that Lab Experiments are lacking in ecological validity -- that is, how accurately the conditions simulated within a laboratory reflect real life conditions -- and thus decided to conduct his own studies.

The research proved the opposite of lab experiments, and Piliavin concluded that people helped because of a model known as 'Arousal - Cost and Reward'. In depth, they argue that firstly, observation of an emergency situation creates an emotional arousal in bystanders. This arousal may be perceived as fear, disgust or sympathy, depending on aspects of the situation.

his state of arousal can be increased by a number of factors including:

Empathy with the victim (i.e. whether you can perceive yourself in the victims situation);
Being close to the emergency;
The length of time the emergency continues for.

This state of arousal can be reduced by a number of factors including:

Helping;
Seeking help from another source;
Leaving the scene;
Deciding the person doesn’t need or deserve help.

Therefore according to this model we are motivated to help people not by altruism (acting in the interest of others) but as a way of reducing unpleasant feelings of arousal.

Personally, I hypothesis further that people also act altruistically as a way of making themselves look good: they help people so that others perceive them as nice people.

[1] = Diffusion of responsibility is the idea that people are less likely to offer to help someone if there are others present, because they perceive responsibility as being shared between all present, and therefore see themselves as being less personally responsible.

Pluralistic ignorance is the tendency for people in a group to mislead each other about an emergency situation. For example, a person might perceive an emergency as a non-emergency because others are remaining calm and not taking action.

 

[BlargHonk]

The only true selfless act is an atheist who saves someone, but dies in the process

 

[Gilles]

If you follow the thread, you'll eventually have a reason in which you wanted to benefit yourself in some way or the other. All acts can be concluded as selfish in some way or the other, really.

There's nothing you do selflessly, because everything you do, you do to benefit yourself in some way or the other.

The benefit is the effect, not necessarily the cause. I've said that already. Just because you are rewarded for something, does not mean you did it for that reward.

Empathy with the victim (i.e. whether you can perceive yourself in the victims situation);
Being close to the emergency;
The length of time the emergency continues for.

This state of arousal can be reduced by a number of factors including:

Helping;
Seeking help from another source;
Leaving the scene;
Deciding the person doesn’t need or deserve help.

Therefore according to this model we are motivated to help people not by altruism (acting in the interest of others) but as a way of reducing unpleasant feelings of arousal.

Again, we can be motivated by this, but I still believe we can do selfless acts as well. I don't see how this proves we can't or don't. I think beyond this arousal (or perhaps tied to it) is a part of us that desires good (all good comes from God, and so our desire ultimately is for God). We can act simply out of a desire to protect this good, or to do a good work.

 

[V.I]

Again, we can be motivated by this, but I still believe we can do selfless acts as well. I don't see how this proves we can't or don't. I think beyond this arousal (or perhaps tied to it) is a part of us that desires good (all good comes from God, and so our desire ultimately is for God). We can act simply out of a desire to protect this good, or to do a good work.

Ah, but could you not then follow the line that our love for God comes from our upbringing, and thus is the main drive for us doing 'good' is so that we can please him/her(/it?)? I haven't had a religious upbringing, so my motives must be purely self-centred?

I understand your viewpoint, honestly, it's just somewhat of a razors edge at the moment: we're stating points that could go both ways, and we have no proof that our arguments are anything more than fallacy. But, I guess, that's philosophy.

 

[hi.gin.tonic]

i do it for the lulz

While investigating this question using various tools I have stumbled upon what an astounding occurrence; However, some might not be able to fully comprehend the ultimate solution to this perplexing ambivalent statement.

 

[Gilles]

Ah, but could you not then follow the line that our love for God comes from our upbringing, and thus is the main drive for us doing 'good' is so that we can please him/her(/it?)? I haven't had a religious upbringing, so my motives must be purely self-centred?

I understand your viewpoint, honestly, it's just somewhat of a razors edge at the moment: we're stating points that could go both ways, and we have no proof that our arguments are anything more than fallacy. But, I guess, that's philosophy.

Me making a decision because I believe it to be the will of God is due to my "upbringing", however I believe God created in us a desire for him, and for all things good. It's one reason we usually find nature beautiful. So you still have the same desire for good that I do, even if your desire for God is not conscious. Besides, I said we need a driving force to make us do something, but I don't believe that means we can't do something selflessly.

 

[Callahan]

There's a meaning to life because we can give our own meaning to life.
But most of other living being are not conscious of themselve and thus they can't even give a meaning to their life but they can't even think their lives has no meaning.

What's the meaning of life? is a pseudo philosophical question that people quote to parody philosophy or if they have no idea of philosophical topic.

 

[DocDude]

everything we do we do for happiness.
be it a pleasure lasting a moment. suffring now to be happy on the long term or doing things just to not be sad.

people are not selfish in evil ways thats just what we are.

some people are happy when they help other people. some people are just sad when they know they could help someone and didnt do it, some people are not effected by these sort of things while other people enjoy seeing others suffer.

if i care deeply for someone it will make me feel good to see him feels good, these is often called as being UNselfish.

if i see somone in danger but im not helping him becouse i fear of getting hurt i may be called selfish.

 

[V.I]

That's what I said when I mentioned the 'pleasure' drive, DocDude.

And that's it, Gilles. We both have the same drives, we just name it different things.