Um...anyone know the whole purpose of life?

[Aim64C]

I'm watching the video.

At bolded: I'm convinced it's hopeless and I don't see any upcoming change for the better. The only power we modern-day paycheck slaves have, is to better ourselves as we cannot influence the authorities' decisions the way we'd want to.

If I were to be an american citizen, I'd be a constitutionalist and an avid Ron Paul supporter. Watch the rigged elections and media prevent dr. Paul from putting a hold to the country's expansionist, emperialistic agenda. In my country, we keep going through spending cuts but, ironically the politicians' salaries and annual bonusses keep rising. And what's even more funny is that our premier Mark Rutte even has the nerve to respond to local citizens who called him the 'big boss', that they are his bosses because they elected him. He has 16 million bosses. (the amount of citizens in Holland)

So, if he has 16 million bosses, why has he accumulated more wealth than most of his ''bosses'' and to make it better; through his ''bosses'' taxpayers money.

Forget it, I'm just ranting. The purpose of life is to be a productive slave, period.

There is a cycle to nations.



[video=youtube;EdSq5H7awi8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdSq5H7awi8[/video]

There is a coming time when we will all be in a sort of "Minecraft world" - where many of our large central governments no longer have the capacity to enforce laws of collection (if challenged) and of arbitrary regulation.

All impossible systems must eventually meet their mathematical end.

When the systems of enforcement collapse (and some, particularly in Europe, will have to be challenged), it will bring about a vast array of opportunities for people.

I fear that Europe will simply double-down on socialism and become communist ("because the bankers caused this" and the government proclaims itself to be more trustworthy)...

But that isn't necessarily set in stone. Most of those governments are suicidally embracing Islam - so the result should be pretty interesting.

The key lies in understanding what wealth is.

Wealth is not currency - or even 'money.' Wealth is your work - your trades - the things you do for others in society that convey a savings of time or effort. The man who welds and maintains plows (among other things) is valuable for the time he saves the farmers. The fewer people need to work the farms, the more can work the mines - or the forge - or can pursue other non-survival related tasks.

Money is simply a material that reserves that value for later exchange. It allows us to save many small acts for one larger product/service - or divide one large product/service into many smaller needs/wants.

Life is really a whole hell of a lot simpler than we've engineered it to be and it will eventually shift back (very quickly) to that simplistic way.

Not without war and conflict, mind you.

But it will come soon enough.

 

[GraceLillian]

I guess I now know why your called a Genius, huh "Called a Genius?" :x3: Though all jokes aside, that's one selfless mission you've have for yourself , and so I hope you'll be able to say when your of a good, old age "Mission Accomplished" Called a Genius

 

[Tennis Robot]

I guess I now know why your called a Genius, huh "Called a Genius?" :x3: Though all jokes aside, that's one selfless mission you've have for yourself , and so I hope you'll be able to say when your of a good, old age "Mission Accomplished" Called a Genius

Thank you That would be nice. I don't know if I should be called selfless though. I have done a lot of bad things...

 

[GraceLillian]

XD I meant basketball.

Sure you did Dantee, sure you did... XD But I'll take your word for it, because now you made me :hooray:

 

[Aim64C]

So what if his argument still makes sense to those who have studied the bible. Does that still make him a straw man, or is he simply a straw man because you say he is.

So the mathematical probability of a God is dependent upon the Hebrew depiction of a God?

Why not the Buddhist depiction of God?

Or the various deities in Taoism?

Why should the depiction of the God of the Hebrews be used as the metric by which to evaluate the notion of deism?

Further - as I said - Dawkins has fallen out of favor even within atheist circles:

"In these pages Douglas Murray recently recounted debating alongside Richard Dawkins and being embarrassed by the crudity of his approach. Murray is not one of life’s fence-sitters: it must have occurred to him that atheism has polemical possibilities that would suit him rather well. But he has the sense to turn down the role of the new Christopher Hitchens. A polemical approach to religion has swung out of fashion. In fact, admitting that religion is complicated has become a mark of sophistication. Andrew Brown of the Guardian has played a role in this shift: he’s a theologically literate agnostic who is scornful of crude atheist crusading, and who sometimes ponders his own attraction to religion. On a more academic level, the philosopher John Gray has had an influence: he is sceptical of all relics of Enlightenment optimism, including the atheist’s faith in reason.

What, if anything, do these newer atheists have to say? In previous generations, the atheist was keen to insist that non-believers can be just as moral as believers. These days, this is more or less taken for granted. What distinguishes the newer atheist is his admission that non-believers can be just as immoral as believers. Rejecting religion is no sure path to virtue; it is more likely to lead to complacent self-regard, or ideological arrogance."

Basically, Dawkins and I aren't even on the same page of debate.

I can and have argued for the psychological -need- for humans to believe in a higher power/process to avoid neurological conditions that correlate to narcissism and sociopathic behavior.

Dawkins, himself, is actually an agnostic more so than an atheist. Most atheists are agnostic but lack the articulation to communicate this without a full discussion on the issue that is often avoided.

 

[Multiply]

So the mathematical probability of a God is dependent upon the Hebrew depiction of a God?

Why not the Buddhist depiction of God?

Or the various deities in Taoism?

Why should the depiction of the God of the Hebrews be used as the metric by which to evaluate the notion of deism?

It was an example.

Further - as I said - Dawkins has fallen out of favor even within atheist circles:

"In these pages Douglas Murray recently recounted debating alongside Richard Dawkins and being embarrassed by the crudity of his approach. Murray is not one of life’s fence-sitters: it must have occurred to him that atheism has polemical possibilities that would suit him rather well. But he has the sense to turn down the role of the new Christopher Hitchens. A polemical approach to religion has swung out of fashion. In fact, admitting that religion is complicated has become a mark of sophistication. Andrew Brown of the Guardian has played a role in this shift: he’s a theologically literate agnostic who is scornful of crude atheist crusading, and who sometimes ponders his own attraction to religion. On a more academic level, the philosopher John Gray has had an influence: he is sceptical of all relics of Enlightenment optimism, including the atheist’s faith in reason.

What, if anything, do these newer atheists have to say? In previous generations, the atheist was keen to insist that non-believers can be just as moral as believers. These days, this is more or less taken for granted. What distinguishes the newer atheist is his admission that non-believers can be just as immoral as believers. Rejecting religion is no sure path to virtue; it is more likely to lead to complacent self-regard, or ideological arrogance."

What is this supposed to mean to me? Because Dawkins is harsh when he talks about these topics means what he says is any less true? I'm supposed to dismiss everything he says because I don't like his attitude? That's ridiculous.

Basically, Dawkins and I aren't even on the same page of debate.

I can and have argued for the psychological -need- for humans to believe in a higher power/process to avoid neurological conditions that correlate to narcissism and sociopathic behavior.

Oh I don't believe that at all(That does not mean you need to elaborate on it. I'm simply saying I don't agree).

Dawkins, himself, is actually an agnostic more so than an atheist. Most atheists are agnostic but lack the articulation to communicate this without a full discussion on the issue that is often avoided.

I too am an agnostic. I share many view points as atheists but growing up in a religious household and having a church going family makes me think that it would be a good thing to have a heaven to go to after death. I just don't see any proof in it so I tend to side with atheists. If someone were to provide tangible proof, however, I'd flip flop faster than Mitt Romney.

 

[slayerdanger]

I don't there is a purpose because I don't believe anybody gave us one

 

[Waindo]

Love.
Love life, live love; be the change you want to see in the world, it will surely make a difference.

I had to post this xd
[video=youtube_share;7DA2MKuI6fs]http://youtu.be/7DA2MKuI6fs[/video]

 

[Callypigia]

Our sole purpose is to exist. We are born, we live, we die, we cease to live. If you want something more than that it's up to you. Happiness is being content in each present moment. Work towards being content with what you have because endlessly craving more and more creates suffering.

 

[Kishi Uzumaki]

That's a question that come to my mind, when others tell me that I'm not doing enough in life and i question that if it's all i should do if i said bluntly, they tell me that working or having a job, getting married and having kids that's life and if you have that then you're successful but thing i see is they've all that still they're not living happily so let's say for now just trying to find something middle there to be successful and happy

Purpose of life ? :hmm: personally i think, it's something only a person himself can find so it can be anything from been a professional to having a family or to living in the moment not concerned about things that bothers many people or the society .

 

[GhostProject]

American education reform

 

[Wabbit]

Why should there be a purpose? What is the purpose of a rock?

 

[FemmeFatale]

Id tell you , but it be my will to have you learn it for yourself, it is much more rewarding.

 

[Lillith]

I don't like to think in such things, it makes me depressive because I realize how much everything is so meaningless.

 

[GraceLillian]

It was an example.



What is this supposed to mean to me? Because Dawkins is harsh when he talks about these topics means what he says is any less true? I'm supposed to dismiss everything he says because I don't like his attitude? That's ridiculous.



Oh I don't believe that at all(That does not mean you need to elaborate on it. I'm simply saying I don't agree).



I too am an agnostic. I share many view points as atheists but growing up in a religious household and having a church going family makes me think that it would be a good thing to have a heaven to go to after death. I just don't see any proof in it so I tend to side with atheists. If someone were to provide tangible proof, however, I'd flip flop faster than Mitt Romney.

Cole World I'm glad to know you consider the possibility of their being a " heaven to go to after our death." As you said yourself , but are in need of real proof, evidence to help you believe so here's one video link ->

You must be registered for see links

about heaven and this video link ->

You must be registered for see links

about hell. These two videos will help answer the question most people ask in their minds which is " If GOD exists then wouldn't heaven and hell exist as well? "

 

[DroGGz0r]

Depends on the scale...

I don't think there's any outside of evolution, if we're talking on a large scale. If not, it just comes down to the trivial things like being happy and this sort of shit...

 

[GraceLillian]

I don't like to think in such things, it makes me depressive because I realize how much everything is so meaningless.

True, Lillith except about what you said that "everything is so meaningless." Since haven't you ever consider when you spend time with your beloved family and friends. Just having a good time with them wherever you go. Then as you say goodbye to them and go home, your left with memories, sweet, loving memories about your time you spend with them. :hug: An isn't these memories meaningful too you Lillith? If so, then not everything here on earth is so meaningless Lillith. :yayy:

 

[Lillith]

True, Lillith except about what you said that "everything is so meaningless." Since haven't you ever consider when you spend time with your beloved family and friends. Just having a good time with them wherever you go. Then as you say goodbye to them and go home, your left with memories, sweet, loving memories about your time you spend with them. :hug: An isn't these memories meaningful too you Lillith? If so, then not everything here on earth is so meaningless Lillith. :yayy:

Of course such memories are beautiful and have a meaning to us. But if we think deep about it, nothing is eternal. Everything die someday, we will disappear as well as our memories and legacy. It depresses me somehow.

 

[GraceLillian]

Of course such memories are beautiful and have a meaning to us. But if we think deep about it, nothing is eternal. Everything die someday, we will disappear as well as our memories and legacy. It depresses me somehow.

Hey no need for :NO: to be shed now Lillith, though speaking about the legacy we will leave behind once we pass away to the afterlife. Even after our time is over here on earth, at least our legacy will not disappear, you know die away. Since just think about what Martian Luther King Jr did during the 50's and 60's in America. Fighting against the racial situation here in America at that time peacefully. Then after he dies and it being many years later we, the people here on earth still remember him, the great legacy he left behind once he passed away. Another example is George Washington who helped as a general in the battlefield for his country's freedom and being the 1st president of the United States of America. That all happened in the 18th century and look where in the 21st century and still remember him, his wonderful legacy. :flowers So you see Lillith, even after we die, we leave our legacy behind that will help future generations to come and it won't be forgotten.

 

[Jazzy Stardust]

I think it's about lessons and choices to help or hurt your grow as an individual.