All of BertM's Comments + Replies

BertM
20

Okay. Not sure what the reason is for the negative points on my last 2 replies. I will admit my response to this article was fuelled by my own frustrations. But still I do not see where my logic fails when I say: "Life is objectively without purpose afawk. The rational thing to do is accept that."

For the past 30 years I lived a life without meaning, purpose, passion, importance, you name it. Still, I feel no need to end it, nor does that mean I cannot enjoy things. But what that does do is make me feel lonely. I see everyone around me, everywhere... (read more)

BertM
-10

I am sorry. I must word my argument/question very badly because we are drifting away from my gripe with the article. Perhaps I'll just close with explaining how I experience life:

Life just is. Life just tries to keep alive. To keep alive, humans (and other animals) feel good/bad in certain situations.

To me, nowhere in this, there is anything important, useful or goal-centric. Since we are aware, cognitive beings, we struggle with reconciling our survival-instinct with the fact it is all pointless. So we invent things like cricket, money, importance, life p... (read more)

BertM
00

To me, they are the same things... human concoctions; words for things that do not exists anywhere else but in our imagination. Then again, I hope I am wrong about that.

The text states:

Some of these things are important. Some of them are unimportant.

It should have read:

Some of these things are important to you. Some of them are unimportant to you.

But even then it still implies that things that are important and unimportant exist for you. It is a statement of fact where no fact exists.

The best way to have phrased that would be something like:

You can mak... (read more)

0casebash
"It should have read: "Some of these things are important to you. Some of them are unimportant to you."" The importance being relative to you is implied and I believe that most people get the implication. Remember the Typical Mind Fallacy. "But even then it still implies that things that are important and unimportant exist for you. It is a statement of fact where no fact exists." - what you don't think people have things they consider important?
BertM
20

I take "important" to be a human invention. Which is, like you say, not universal. Each importance is individual and at best shared by a group of people. As such I would argue it is a belief which does not relate to an 'objective' reality. I suspect that everyone needs a false belief in order to have a drive to live because reality puts us in a catch-22 (programmed to survive, but death is inevitable).

I am not saying we should demand a universal, objective importance. What I am saying is we must demand rationality and truth. There is nothing wron... (read more)

1gjm
Yup. So is cricket. None the less, there is a definite answer to the question "Did so-and-so score 100 runs in the last game, or not?". OK. But it might (like beliefs about cricket scores) relate to a not-so-objective reality. What you certainly can't rightly do is leap from "is not a statement of objective truth" to "is a statement of objective falsehood". If "important" is a predicate that only has a definite meaning once you say for whom, the same is true of "not important". But that's exactly what I'm saying you don't need to do. (Unless the belief in question is that whatever-it-is is universally, eternally important. That might be false. But I don't see why you need such beliefs in the first place.) I'm not sure exactly what "it" is here. The urgency you attach to remaining alive probably is just your survival instinct talking. (Though it may also be influenced by, e.g., other people's interest in your remaining alive.) But whatever sense of importance you attach to things other than remaining alive surely has other origins.
BertM
20

Here’s the truth. We exist on this earth for some undetermined period of time. During that time we do things. Some of these things are important. Some of them are unimportant. And those important things give our lives meaning and happiness. The unimportant ones basically just kill time.

What is important though? Isn't that just subjective as well as illusionary? Purely objectively speaking (if such a thing is possible) everything is relative, even importance e.g. what is important for me, might not be for you, what is important in 1765 might not be impor... (read more)

2BertM
Okay. Not sure what the reason is for the negative points on my last 2 replies. I will admit my response to this article was fuelled by my own frustrations. But still I do not see where my logic fails when I say: "Life is objectively without purpose afawk. The rational thing to do is accept that." For the past 30 years I lived a life without meaning, purpose, passion, importance, you name it. Still, I feel no need to end it, nor does that mean I cannot enjoy things. But what that does do is make me feel lonely. I see everyone around me, everywhere, hiding behind their own self-created "purposes". To me, it is like everyone is digging holes and trying to find something, totally oblivious to that fact that there is a vast world above ground. It is just an -no doubt biased- observation/feeling. I didn't respond to disagree with the article, but to see if anyone can give me a logical, rational reason to agree with it (=start digging a hole). I failed in that. Sorry.
0gjm
"Thus"? I think that only follows if you take "important" to mean something like "universally important, to all people at all times and in all places, and even in places like the moon where there are no people". In that case: sure, pretty much anything you care to mention will fail to be "important". But why should we demand that?
0casebash
The idea is that identifying what you consider to be important and not important is more tractable than trying to discover your "life purpose".
BertM
20

Retracted

[This comment is no longer endorsed by its author]Reply
3[anonymous]
Please don't regret it! Welcome.