Ridiculous Philisophy?

[cashmerelc]

I recently picked up Ayn Rand's novel 'Atlas Shrugged.' If any of you haven't read it, I would highly recommend it because it contains characters with a wide variety of philosophies, all of which are interesting.

At any rate, there is one character in particular who is attending a party and discusses his own philosophy on humanity.

I'll include some quotations from his conversation.

Dr. Pritchett: Man? What is man? He's just a collection of chemicals with delusions of grandeur. Man's metaphysical pretensions are preposterous. A miserable bit of protoplasm, full of ugly little concepts and mean little emotions--and it imagines itself important! Really, you know, that is the root of all the troubles in the world.

A matron: But which concepts are not ugly or mean, Professor?

Dr. Pritchett: None. None within the range of man's capacity.

A young man: But if we haven't got any good concepts, how do we know that the ones we've got are ugly? I mean, by what standard?

Dr. Pritchett: There aren't any standards. The philosophers of the past were superficial. It remained for our century to redefine the purpose of philosophy. The purpose of philosophy is not to help men find the meaning of life, but to prove to them that there isn't any?

I tend to agree with the idea that humanity has given itself a false sense of importance. That there is some ultimate meaning to our own existence, when, in the grand scheme of things, our place in the universe is meaningless. At the same time, I recognize that this belief is pretty dreadful, but it makes the most sense to me.

Opinions?

[Nameless]

Answer the question, "Who do I live for?"

"Myself" is an acceptable answer.

I live 'for' no "who".
I 'live'!
(Is that 'unacceptable'?)

[Nameless]

...our place in the universe is meaningless.

There is no 'meaning' to anything but what we 'think' as 'meaning'.
Our 'place' in/as the universe is of such supreme 'importance', that the entire universe of the moment, would not be the 'same' if even one of your eyelashes were to suddenly 'wink' out of existence! The 'Perfectly Complete' universe of the moment, that includes 'us', could not exist, as such, without us.
Perhaps 'meaningless', but awesome and wondrous and magnificent and blissful and frightening and sad and painful and thrilling and.. and.. and... nontheless!
*__-

[Assent]

I live 'for' no "who".
I 'live'!
(Is that 'unacceptable'?)

What I mean by "I live for myself" is the thought, "Even if no one else would care if I were to live or die tomorrow, I would, and so I shall continue living." Thus, I would say that the great majority of people at least live for themselves, and that living for oneself is a reason or "purpose" to live.

Concurrently, I don't think it preposterous to think that a person who cannot even say "I care if I live or die" is most likely suffering from a deep depression and is seriously contemplating suicide.

For further comments, I would like to direct you to lines 2 and 3 in my signature. Excuse me for trying to come off as eloquent .

[Nameless]

I live 'for' no "who".
I 'live'!
(Is that 'unacceptable'?)

What I mean by "I live for myself" is the thought, "Even if no one else would care if I were to live or die tomorrow, I would, and so I shall continue living."

I understand, but that is your thought, not mine. I am enjoying the hall out of this life, every bit! It is a wondrous ride! I 'live', and so I shall, as deeply and as powerfully as I do, and then, when through, I shall die when I must. We all do. Shall i worry? Would i miss any 'sun', hauling the clouds behind me?

Thus, I would say that the great majority of people at least live for themselves, and that living for oneself is a reason or "purpose" to live.

I would tend to agree, from this Perspective, with your statement. At least the majority of people that I have known, here in Amerikkka. 'Ego Rules' amongst a certain crowd, eh?

Concurrently, I don't think it preposterous to think that a person who cannot even say "I care if I live or die" is most likely suffering from a deep depression and is seriously contemplating suicide.

Well i'm here to tell you, 'caring' whether I am living is what people who 'care' about such 'thoughts' do. I don't have 'thoughts' like that. I have no responsibility in whether I live or die, eat dinner or starve, laugh or cry, so why should I 'care', and why is that some sort of 'magical state' that will make the least difference in my life (besides as ego fuel)? How does that better occupy my mind than enjoying an early rising bird-song? I don't 'care' too strongly (if at all) about living or dying, but while I appear to be living in/as these amazing universes, I am so greately enjoying the 'ride'; I am undistracted by the notion of 'death'. It has no meaning for me. Actually, neither does 'life'. I just live until I die. I haven't one 'complaint' or regret. As for feeling sad or 'depressed' at times, am I not also human? Is that not part of the complete package?
So, anyway, thats the news from Lake Nameless, where the women are all beautiful and the children are all above average!! *__-

For further comments, I would like to direct you to lines 2 and 3 in my signature.

My arguments are only as true as you will them to be.
Because of the limits of language, we are all wrong
This signature is as much for my benefit as for yours.

So they are relics of 'your' Perspective.
There are other Perspectives.
How relevent here?
Do you want me to share your sense of 'wrongness'?

Peace

[Assent]

My arguments are only as true as you will them to be.

You are free to disagree with my statements if you think them wrong. I give you my blessing to do so. I realize of course that you were free to do so all along, but I find surprisingly few are willing to admit this. For my own part, I put it in my signature.

Because of the limits of language, we are all wrong

I believe that we two are of the same mind on this topic. But because we use different language, different words, expressions, definitions, we seem to disagree.

This signature is as much for my benefit as for yours.

I try to keep these thoughts foremost as I post here. It is my sincerest hope that you might as well.

So they are relics of 'your' Perspective.
There are other Perspectives.
How relevent here?
Do you want me to share your sense of 'wrongness'?

Peace

Well, yes,
Of course,
How relevant is what, exactly? My perspective? Well certainly, I think it relevant. I imagine you think your perspective is relevant as well. Such is the nature of opinions, particularly those expressed.
Are you referring to line two? By that line, I mean that you are right, and I am wrong. Also, you are wrong, and I am right. Both coexist. How? Because we must use words to communicate, and while they are spelled the same, we are meaning different things. I think our ideas are much more similar than our words.

You sound like you enjoy activity much more than peace, and so I shall wish that upon you.

[Nameless]

My arguments are only as true as you will them to be.
Because of the limits of language, we are all wrong

You are free to disagree with my statements if you think them wrong. I give you my blessing to do so. I realize of course that you were free to do so all along, but I find surprisingly few are willing to admit this. For my own part, I put it in my signature.[/quote]
Who do you think me to be that you think that I can or would 'judge' you(r arguments) as 'wrong'. I have no morals, my world is not painted in 'right' and 'wrong'.
By 'wrong', might you mean 'logically sound'? Rational? Mathematically in balance? Make me feel all green and nasty?
You let me know what criteria you'd like me to use... and most important of all, what does the job pay (besides ego gratification, which don't pay for the eggs!)?

Perhaps by 'wrong', you mean what most people mean, 'your' Perspective is different than 'this' Perspective. I see all Perspectives as unique, so that telling me that another one is 'different', ho hum, what else is new?
I can critique the hell out of things on many many levels, from numerous Perspectives... But the (sinfully) moral egoic game of 'judgement' means nothing to me or this universes.

I believe that we two are of the same mind on this topic.

You can 'believe' that Ronald Regan will be the 'second comming', but I aint going to start on that 'wrong' (morality) of yours. We are not 'right', we are not 'wrong', we are Complete, we Are Universe. From this Perspective, anyway. Can you see my meaning? My point?

But because we use different language, different words, expressions, definitions, we seem to disagree.

Oh so often true! Someone said that perhaps its the curvature of space that, like a funhouse mirror distorting our own reflection, we imagine 'strangers'. - Mythopoeicon

This signature is as much for my benefit as for yours.

I try to keep these thoughts foremost as I post here. It is my sincerest hope that you might as well.

Why?

So they are relics of 'your' Perspective.
There are other Perspectives.
How relevent here?
Do you want me to share your sense of 'wrongness'?

Well, yes,
Of course,
How relevant is what, exactly? My perspective?

My arguments are only as true as you will them to be.
Because of the limits of language, we are all wrong
This signature is as much for my benefit as for yours.

We were discussing 'morality', or something, and then the topic turned into your signature, which I couldn't see how this new info was relevent to the prior conversation.
And I wasn't talking about 'truth', and I don't 'want/need/will' anything to be. What is, is.
Ok, dropping the obfuscating 'will', wait a min.. are you saying that you only think that things are 'true' that you have 'willed into truth'? That you can sit and read this pile of words and that you 'will' it into meaning? I figured that one finds meaning, resonance, or not.. no 'will' involved (unless from an egoic Perspective, I guess).

And, just because language is limited in its functionality (like a hammer), that 'limitation' does not, logically, lead to; "we are all wrong" (whatever that might mean).

And, we find "benefit" where and as we do.
I seem to just toss the words and leave the rest to someone who cares! *__-

Well certainly, I think it relevant. I imagine you think your perspective is relevant as well.

Exactly! All Perspectives are equally relevent to Consciousness, but not to Ego.

Such is the nature of opinions, particularly those expressed.
Are you referring to line two? By that line, I mean that you are right, and I am wrong. Also, you are wrong, and I am right. Both coexist. How? Because we must use words to communicate, and while they are spelled the same, we are meaning different things. I think our ideas are much more similar than our words.

Perhaps, but with continued q&a we can spiral into a bit of 'common understanding', 'intersecting Perspectives'.
I'm not practiced well in cyberland, but face to face, I could 'transmit' empathically and bypass any possible misunderstanding, but, this is what we have, at the moment.

You sound like you enjoy activity much more than peace, and so I shall wish that upon you.

Then how about 'peaceful activity'?
Wish? Are you a witch?

[Assent]

Exactly! All Perspectives are equally relevent to Consciousness, but not to Ego.

You capitalize words, and in so doing, give them definite, singular meaning. I do not know these meanings, and so toss about the same words with abandon. And, like a mother hen who sees a man practice juggling with her eggs, you quite understandably take exception.

Because I mean what I am saying, I am right.
Because I do not use your meanings to express this, I am wrong.

Because you state your position using the words you understand, you are right.
Because others do not share this understanding, you are wrong.

And so this "wrongness" of which I speak lies not in one's beliefs, but in the attempt to communicate these beliefs. This is why I go to a site such as this; not to argue or convince others, but to refine my ability to communicate my thoughts and ideas. As such, this conversation has taught me much. Thank you.

[Nameless]

Exactly! All Perspectives are equally relevent to Consciousness, but not to Ego.

You capitalize words, and in so doing, give them definite, singular meaning. I do not know these meanings,

Then, perhaps, you could inquire as to what I mean by the capitalizations?

Because I mean what I am saying, I am right.
Because I do not use your meanings to express this, I am wrong.

We've already been over this ground, I do not judge existence as 'right' or 'wrong'. If this is a question, please rephrase?
By 'meaning what you are saying' when you say that the earth is flat, for example, are you "right"? "Right" in 'your own' Perspective?
Can you express yourself, here, sans the 'judgementalism', for common (shared) clarity?

Because you state your position using the words you understand, you are right.
Because others do not share this understanding, you are wrong.

I understand what you are saying, i think. You speak of 'Perspective', POV, no?

And so this "wrongness" of which I speak lies not in one's beliefs, but in the attempt to communicate these beliefs. This is why I go to a site such as this; not to argue or convince others, but to refine my ability to communicate my thoughts and ideas. As such, this conversation has taught me much. Thank you.

You are welcome. Thanx for the conversation. *__-
Peace

[Play_Dough]

edited...
I tend to agree with the idea that humanity has given itself a false sense of importance. That there is some ultimate meaning to our own existence, when, in the grand scheme of things, our place in the universe is meaningless.
At the same time, I recognize that this belief is pretty dreadful, but it makes the most sense to me.

Opinions?

If our existence is 'meaningless in regard to the universe' then that is very liberating because it indicates (suggests) that it is the individual who must assign 'meaning' to existence (not 'the universe').
If one's personal 'meaning/intention' is to have fun then who cares about 'the response from the universe'?

If we take 'death' out of the equation then what meaning does 'existence' then have?

Your analysis seems to imply, 'then what's the use'?

It does not address (the post) the possibility that it is we who must supply 'the meaning' part to the equation.

If 'the universe' exists as a 'playground' then 'the universe' is justified in ignoring 'our place' in it. It exists for us.... we do not exist 'for it'.
Perhaps, 'healing' this ridiculous 'reversal' that has taken place in human consciousness (to be of 'universal significance') is the initial 'purpose' or 'meaning'.

Perhaps, once we get free of the delusion of 'self-importance' then, and only then, the 'fun part, begins.

.