I’m writing a book at the moment, and I really need some inspiration. I can’t tell more than it’s a philosophical book following a person’s life. I want to answer some of the questions humans always have thought about through this book. Questions without an actual (correct) answer. I have already thought about a few, but I want to be inspired by some of you, as well. Here is some of mine:
– What’s the meaning of life?
– What’s the nature of death?
– How do we get knowledge of the world beyond our minds?
– Do we really have a free will?
– What’s the basis of morality and ethics?
– Why do disasters and evil exist?
… Come you can come up with some. You can add your own answer too, if you want!
@graschi, haha good luck. I’m interested to see how you’ve answered those. Have you simply created your own philosophy/explanation or is there indisputable logic and reasoning behind your answers?
so tell me, what is the meaning of life?
@ehsan, Thank you.
I don’t think it’s possible to answer those questions in a way that’s indisputable. Of course there is logic and reasoning behind my answers, but it’s mainly my own philosophy/explanation, though I find inspiration from other thinkers.
I have to owe you an answer to that question. I’m actually about to write an answer in my book, but I don’t want to share an unfinished product.
The ability of the human race to wield power over itself is an ability which has been constantly debated from a perspective of degree since the beginning of time. The existential truth is simple in revealing the answer to this question as; that which is living possesses life. Although the applicability of this clause does rest on the subjective inclinations, it is precisely this which gives it its power. If a man is to insinuate that he is greater than another man he is to insinuate that the standard of human wants is objective according to his standard otherwise a simple objection of opinion would suffice as an argument for freedom. Thus he is to insinuate that that which can be evidenced must be followed objectively, such as that which is living possesses life. In order to circumvent this argument he must cite the subjective wants of the human will and thus reciprocate his first argument leaving men equal.
@graschi, This is just some ideas on the questions I like to throw out there;
“What is the meaning of life” First you have to know what context you are asking the question in.
In a scientific manner, there are two main things unique to life that as far as we know, no other things in existence possess. Namely Perception and Adaption, so scientifically I’d say the meaning of life lies within those phenomena.
In a more spiritual manner, you can be looking at a vast and subjective range of possibilities, and I think that each of us have a certain right, maybe even an obligation to ourselves, to decide or figure out that definition, one personally tailored by each of us to suit only ourself.
There have been people who basically merge the scientific and the spiritual, I have heard some people say “We are the universe experiencing itself”
The thing with death, it is an unknown, that is why we fear it, humans seem to be repelled by change or difference from what they are accustomed to. In this sense you could relate death to racism and other such cultural and social prejudices.
But also death takes away people we care about, we naturally miss their presence so we translate that to death being one of the more terrible realities, that I believe is reasonably rational.
Personally, on the topic of death, I gravitate toward what Jesus taught. I’m not especially religious but I find Jesus to be comprehensively logical and empathic, he is someone whose judgement I can trust better than anyone including myself on such an unknown, maybe even unknowable. So I believe in a ressurection to life on a paradise Earth, where all people, if we currently believe them good or bad is irrelevant, will be given an opportunity to see if they can adapt to the ideal circumstances or if they would be contrary to it.
In this way I believe death is in the original Torah sense of Sheol, the common grave of humankind where no one is aware of anything at all, not conscious, no time, no perception, no devising as it were.
How do we get knowledge of the world beyond our minds. I have a saying “We cannot know anything for sure until we know everything” That is the ultimate paradox of existence and every point of reference that we have is either subjective or is based on a point of reference that precedes it but at some point that track ends with subjectivity.
We can gather as much information as we can and try to make objective decisions based on that available information and how we interpret it, then hope against all the other variable that may influence an outcome that we get it right. But ultimately I would put it down to some measure of faith. Every one of us has a measure of faith just to remain.
Free-will versus pre-destiny, this question is far more irrelevant than it seems. If things are pre-determined we still don’t know the difference, it doesn’t change how we live our lives. I have a kind of belief in what I call “Pre-Destiny after the fact” where once something happens it was always meant to happen, but not before it happens.
I also like to look at things in this analogy; We are passengers on a train, we can have any number of possible interactions, to which there may be an infinite variety, but the train itself has its pre-determined stops and ultimate destination.
With morality and ethics, I start with a Nihilistic view, that you can reason away pretty much all basis for any kind of morality. But then I figure that humans, like everything, function. Do we or anything else have a specific function? As far as the universe and some divine plan, or lack thereof, I do not know, but life seeks comfort, that is why it adapts, it is trying to find a comfort zone in its existence.
This equates to things like pleasure/pain, love/fear, desire/revulsion, etc. Humans may have some greater purpose, but until we find that we ultimate must put ourselves, the individual and humanity, first. We use our talents for conceptual awareness to invent, create, express, seek this optimal comfort of life. (there are only two real distinctions, individual and collective humanity, I like to point that out because people have gone too far with creating distinctions that make other humans less human than themselves)
Disasters and evil. I tend to refuse to connotate things as “evil” it isn’t really a word, it is a description of things we do not understand, usually things that have a painful or disadvantageous result. But really you have a cause and effect universe, natural disasters are easier to refuse to spin as evil, humans have abilities to nullify natural disasters and one day we will master that by understanding.
When humans perform disasters, accidents are one thing that we have enough trouble trying to resist calling evil, but when someone deliberately causes it, we seem to naturally fall into branding the person and/or the event as evil. This is not true from a scientific/psychological perspective either. Humans (and animals) are subject to a life time of variables that condition them, besides that they may have genetic or physiological abnormalities that can cause them to exhibit a range of behaviors, acceptable or not.
Anyway, that is a little spin I wanted to offer, enjoy :)