The Unbearable Lightness of Being - Philosophy Thread

[AndyWolves]

The sheer amount of things that needed to have happened for you to exist in this very moment is absolutely staggering.

 

[Tredman]

But at least there's xG to add meaning to life

 

[Paul]

We wrote a song called The Unbearable Lightness of Being (Eternal Return) which our singer stole from the film of the same name.

https://soundcloud.com/zeligmusic%2F3-the-unbearable-lightness-of

I liked Zelig, didn't they support someone once ?................................................................

 

[AndyWolves]

But at least there's xG to add meaning to life

I prefer the drake equation in this context

 

[machin05]

I liked Zelig, didn't they support someone once ?................................................................

One or two bands, yes....

 

[WolfMan]

I couldn't disagree more, being beholden to a religion isn't something to be envious of, it limits choice.

How so mate? It seems the only viable alternative to religion is to make peace with the fact everything is essentially meaningless.

 

[WolfMan]

The difference being that crops don't have the combination of physicality and conscious thought whereas we as humans (and other animals) do.

I thought science has substantiated that all animals are capable of free will and that we are the dominant species because of our abilities. Darwin's evolutionary theory at work.

It is our own social constructs that reduces free will isn't it?

If your question is asking about why humans have a consciousness that others don't then good luck finding those answers.

I think the current scientific thinking is leaning against the idea of free will.

They've done experiments where they scan people's brains and shown that the relevant areas light up fractions of a second before the person is consciously aware of what they are going to do.

There's also the element of action and reaction that dictates if you were theoretically able to take account of the motion of every particle in the universe, you'd be able to simulate the past and future, so everything that has happened was always going to happen as it's just cause and effect.

The conscious question is the one that interests me the most, it's called the hard problem in neuroscience, they've worked out alot of how the brain works in mechanical terms, but they've essentially got no idea where or why consicouness arises.

An interesting question for me is how far down does consciousness go, obviously humans have it, pretty sure most people would agree dogs have it, and cats, but do spiders have it, or plants? If they don't, at what point does consciousness stop?

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

How so mate? It seems the only viable alternative to religion is to make peace with the fact everything is essentially meaningless.

How does it limit choice? It's obvious isn't it? Religion has "rules" within it of how you should live your life, whether it's going to church every Sunday or having to wear a Burka.

 

[WolfMan]

How does it limit choice? It's obvious isn't it? Religion has "rules" within it of how you should live your life, whether it's going to church every Sunday or having to wear a Burka.

I don't think the burka is specifically a rule within the religion itself, more an extreme interpretation by some of the more fundamentalist movements isn't it? Plenty of Muslims across the world don't wear them do they.

Going to church on a Sunday, if you were a true believer, this wouldn't be a chore and more a pretty essential and fulfilling part of your life wouldn't it?

As I said I'll never be able to believe, it's just not in me. But I can see the utility of it for people. Ignorance is bliss in a way, if you could live your life in the certainty that anyone you've loved that's died is in heaven, and you'll be joining them when you die, does it really matter that it's not true?

 

[Hereford Wolf]

I tend toward the Humanist point of view :-

Humanism would define real religion as the simple creed of duty, by which all seek their own welfare in their own way, with a loving and fair regard to the welfare and rights of others. It is not concerned with ghosts and phantoms, with miracles and monstrosities - that is to say with theology in all its forms.

Humanists reject the idea or belief in a supernatural being such as God. This means that humanists class themselves as agnostic or atheist. ... Humanists are concerned with human welfare and happiness and believe that this is the one and only life and world they have.

 

[sycophantia]

I tend toward the Humanist point of view :-

Humanism would define real religion as the simple creed of duty, by which all seek their own welfare in their own way, with a loving and fair regard to the welfare and rights of others. It is not concerned with ghosts and phantoms, with miracles and monstrosities - that is to say with theology in all its forms.

Humanists reject the idea or belief in a supernatural being such as God. This means that humanists class themselves as agnostic or atheist. ... Humanists are concerned with human welfare and happiness and believe that this is the one and only life and world they have.

This is as close to religion that I get

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

I don't think the burka is specifically a rule within the religion itself, more an extreme interpretation by some of the more fundamentalist movements isn't it? Plenty of Muslims across the world don't wear them do they.

Going to church on a Sunday, if you were a true believer, this wouldn't be a chore and more a pretty essential and fulfilling part of your life wouldn't it?

As I said I'll never be able to believe, it's just not in me. But I can see the utility of it for people. Ignorance is bliss in a way, if you could live your life in the certainty that anyone you've loved that's died is in heaven, and you'll be joining them when you die, does it really matter that it's not true?

I was trying to explain how religion limits choice though, and extreme interpretations are exactly that, they limit choice, choice to be who you want to be sexually, choice about what you wear, what you can do.

And those who believe that people should wear Burkas, or shouldn't have a blood transfusion when they are ill, or that their neighbours who believe in a different god to them should die, they don't believe themselves that they are extreme either, they simply believe that they are right.

"if you could live your life in the certainty that anyone you've loved that's died is in heaven, and you'll be joining them when you die, does it really matter that it's not true?"

Why is that a better way to think than any other more scientific way though? If people believe in heaven they presumably believe in God too, how do they square that circle? God simultaneously gives people heaven to live in after they have died, but also imposes/doesn't stop great suffering on millions/billions every day? I don't understand how anyone can understand/cope with that flawed logic.

 

[WolfMan]

I was trying to explain how religion limits choice though, and extreme interpretations are exactly that, they limit choice, choice to be who you want to be sexually, choice about what you wear, what you can do.

And those who believe that people should wear Burkas, or shouldn't have a blood transfusion when they are ill, or that their neighbours who believe in a different god to them should die, they don't believe themselves that they are extreme either, they simply believe that they are right.

"if you could live your life in the certainty that anyone you've loved that's died is in heaven, and you'll be joining them when you die, does it really matter that it's not true?"

Why is that a better way to think than any other more scientific way though? If people believe in heaven they presumably believe in God too, how do they square that circle? God simultaneously gives people heaven to live in after they have died, but also imposes/doesn't stop great suffering on millions/billions every day? I don't understand how anyone can understand/cope with that flawed logic.

I can't really disagree with anything you've said there. I'm not a defender of religion. "Good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion"

I'm not sure if people just do terrible things regardless of religion though to be honest. If we were to rid the world of religion, I'm pretty sure all the nasty shit that's currently done to people in the name of religion would carry on under a different guise. I basically think humans are the problem, religion after all is a human invention.

My point was more that there's obviously a fundamental human yearning for meaning, every culture in history apart from the last 100 or so years has had religion as a central pillar. You could argue science is objectively a better way of understanding the world and I wouldn't disagree from a purely practical perspective. I just think that in the process, we've also lost something important psychologically.

The only viable view when seeing the world from a purely objective scientific point of view is one that says nothing matters, which doesn't account for this fundamental need humans have for meaning. Maybe we're in a transitional phase and something meaningful will come to replace it. I'd argue that at the moment the dominant religion is money, consumerism and economic growth, which is fine, but that doesn't provide this deeper sense of meaning and purpose that people instinctively yearn for. There's so much anxiety and depression in the western world, it's a relatively new thing and the collapse of religion is never really discussed as a possible contributing factor.

Again I'm not defending religion, just saying what's replaced it doesn't really do the job that it used to for our collective psyches. How all this will play out I don't know, because that urge in people won't go away, it'll probably just get put on other things like nationalism etc.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Likewise i agree.

It was the original notion that i disagreed with, the one where you said it must be easier to have a faith or that you are envious of those that do.

Believing in something that has ideas that are so flawed would trouble me, i see flat earthers are constantly ridiculed, i don't see why people who believe in a God or a religion aren't too.

In fact it seems that just because Christianity has been around for such a long time it escapes ridicule, the newer religions or beliefs such as flat earthers, or scientology are relentlessly ridiculed, yet why are they any less believable than Christianity, Islam or Buddhism?

 

[WolfMan]

Likewise i agree.

It was the original notion that i disagreed with, the one where you said it must be easier to have a faith or that you are envious of those that do.

Believing in something that has ideas that are so flawed would trouble me, i see flat earthers are constantly ridiculed, i don't see why people who believe in a God or a religion aren't too.

In fact it seems that just because Christianity has been around for such a long time it escapes ridicule, the newer religions or beliefs such as flat earthers, or scientology are relentlessly ridiculed, yet why are they any less believable than Christianity, Islam or Buddhism?

To he honest I am envious in a way, through talking to people in my life it seems most people are able to put the fact of their own mortality out of their minds and live their lives.

For some reason I've never been able to do it, I don't know why. I spend a really unhealthy amount of time fixating on my own and my loved ones mortality and how life is essentially futile. I'm terrible with anxiety as I'm constantly worrying about whether I'm spending the finite time I've got left wisely, rather than just enjoying the moment. It's always in the background even when I'm having a good time. If someone gave me a pill and said take this and you'd believe in an afterlife, I'd more than likely take it in a heartbeat. I agree with everything you've said in terms of the problems with religion though.

 

[nimrod]

Likewise i agree.

It was the original notion that i disagreed with, the one where you said it must be easier to have a faith or that you are envious of those that do.

Believing in something that has ideas that are so flawed would trouble me, i see flat earthers are constantly ridiculed, i don't see why people who believe in a God or a religion aren't too.

In fact it seems that just because Christianity has been around for such a long time it escapes ridicule, the newer religions or beliefs such as flat earthers, or scientology are relentlessly ridiculed, yet why are they any less believable than Christianity, Islam or Buddhism?

aren't flat earthers ridiculed more because the earth can be proved as not being flat without the need to die first. didn't an ancient greek guy have a good go at estimating the circumference of the earth using shadows and got pretty close.

i'm not sure freddie flintoff has had a better go at demonstrating that the world is flat. he can't see the curve seems to be the explanation.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

Can find plenty of purpose and meaning in life without any hint if religion.

Some people see great purpose in reproduction and raising children, some people want to do something grand that will change the lives of many for the better. Others are content with smaller scale acts of kindness and happy to make even the smallest impact on anything.

You judge your existence entirely how you desire, finding meaning or lack there of will be seen both negatively and positively by different people.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

aren't flat earthers ridiculed more because the earth can be proved as not being flat without the need to die first. didn't an ancient greek guy have a good go at estimating the circumference of the earth using shadows and got pretty close.

i'm not sure freddie flintoff has had a better go at demonstrating that the world is flat. he can't see the curve seems to be the explanation.

Can't all religion be proven to be bollocks by science too?

 

[nimrod]

Can't all religion be proven to be bollocks by science too?

All?

i think you can disprove the literal words of, say, the bible but you'd probably get the answer that it's not meant to be taken literally unless you're talking to a complete fruitcake.

more difficult to disprove there's a soul/spirit and a place for it to inhabit post death, partly because it's a comforting thought for many people, never mind the indoctrination.

As for, say, scientology. I don't know much about the "detail" or the religion but I imagine if mankind had the means it would terraform worlds and probably experiment in different ways with them, so that as a concept is not unbelievable. having a sci-fi writer imagine it could happen doesn't exactly prove it happened here and even were it true, why form a religion about it? if they did exist the fuckers aren't here helping out are they?

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Why form a religion about anything?

Well, i say that, i understand why religion initially came about as it was a very logical way of controlling people, the 10 commandments for example are going to help create order and stop people being bloody horrible to one another, at a time when law and order aren't as robust as they are now, but the need for religion now, i personally don't understand?

If people are arguing that some parts of the bible aren't meant to be taken literally, then i don't think they have a good argument about which parts **should** be taken seriously, that's just daft. It's fiction or non fiction surely? It can't be both.

I find the line that fossils were put on earth by God to "test our faith" a ridiculous argument, for example. But it's one that many Christians use.

I'm not arguing with you directly here of course, just think it's interesting, and i'm not really satisfied as to why some religions are derided as being less likely or believable than others, but hey i guess there will be plenty of people who think those that don't believe should be derided too.

I'm certainly not defending flat earthers or scientologists. I just think their ideas are as daft as Christians, Buddhists or Muslims, it's all as likely as fairies and unicorns to me. Where as i can physically see a fossil.