Are some SS'ers just seeing what they want to see or am I missing something?

[nitrogen]

Many folks on SS wrote that they don't believe in hell after death because the hot water they're in right now is already hell, that earth as we know it is already a living hell, that they're in a hell of their own making, that life is worse than any hell they could have imagined, etc. These reasons pop up again and again. Also, people post "you'll be in a better place soon" or something along that line on goodbye threads quite often.

Since nobody really knows what happens after death, nobody knows how CTB affects afterlife or the next life if there's one, and nobody has the whole picture of the objective reality, how do they make that leap of faith and believe they can't end up in a worse place than they're in right now?

There are "known unknowns" and "unknown unknowns." Known unknowns are the questions we humans have raised but haven't found answers to. The unknown unknowns are the questions that nobody has even thought of asking yet - just like ants never wonder why quantum mechanics can't reconcile with general relativity. Due to the unknown unknowns, I'm forced to look at CTB from a risk management perspective. I've always been agnostic - I can't find enough empirical evidence to be 100% certain of anything but also can't discount any possibilities.

The situation that anybody is in seems can always get worse. Not to be pessimistic, but when my understanding of reality and the universe is limited, I'd have to consider the worst scenario and determine whether it's a state of existence I can bear. As a random example, what if "souls" do exist and can get stuck in a perpetual state of going through the agony of, say, being skinned alive if they died by CTB? That sounds worse than any form of disability, homelessness, poverty, losing loved ones.

So, do those folks romanticize or sugarcoat the unknown because such wishful thinking makes death more palatable? Or to strengthen the belief that CTB is a permanent solution to their problems? Or is it just a figure of speech for saying "my life sucks?"

Do they actually believe that the person who's about to CTB will be in a better place soon or is it like people saying "everything is gonna be fine" when they're in fact clueless and scared IRL? Or is it like saying a prayer?

Fear of the unknown is the hurdle I've been failing to jump over and deters me from "pulling the CTB trigger," so it baffles me how "the grass is greener on the other side" assumption caught on and became pervasive on SS. I wonder if it has to do with the manifestation of a common neurosis that dubious reasoning becomes more legitimate when more people with the same reasoning pile on, or if it's an example of people bias their interpretation of evidence and experience toward what they desire (which is a tendency that has been explored and confirmed by psychological science studies). Or maybe I'm really missing something. Feel free to enlighten me.

 

[a.n.kirillov]

As a random example, what if "souls" do exist and can get stuck in a perpetual state of going through the agony of, say, being skinned alive if they died by CTB? That sounds worse than any form of disability, homelessness, poverty, losing loved ones.

What if everyone over 30 years old is replaced by a philosophical zombie clone robot and is sent to an alien slave colony to produce gut bacteria for the alien society to farm, because it is a delicacy on their planet?

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

In life, the people who are considering suicide are in very dark places, rational or not. Most people use it as a figure of speech, whether or not they believe in the afterlife is dependant on the specific person.

You know how when people are bad mentally, some say they are in a "bad place right now," that seems related to this. They are saying that, they'll be at "peace". By peace, they mean their torture will be over. Whether they believe their consciousness will continue after the final exit, is a separate issue. The primary hypothesis among the community is that consciousness fades, or goes into "nothingness." Yes, you could go into a land where you will be tortured by ogres, but it's not been proven, so why believe that? The brain is, for all intents and purposes, the source of visuals, thinking, logic, etc. Even just using deductive reasoning, if that "source" ends, why would you think it would continue?

 

[a.n.kirillov]

.
I can't be sure of that since I have never been thirty years old
.
TBH with you, the only thing I can imagine is that consciousness is just constrained within in us as some sort of individual 'cells' and that for all suffering to end, all consciousness in the universe has to end. But I can't even wrap my head around that since I have never experienced consciousness outside of my subjective, individual experience AFAIK. And this would be compatible with a basic view of empathy anyways: I don't want to suffer -> I don't want others to suffer.

The belief in a christian hell seems as ridiculous to me as the belief in any other fable or fairy tale.

Your argument doesn't hold anyway, since dying is inevitable. So you would have to believe that suicide vs a natural death will somehow negatively influence the outcome or your position in the proposed 'after-life-life'

In life, the people who are considering suicide are in very dark places, rational or not. Most people use it as a figure of speech, whether or not they believe in the afterlife is dependant on the specific person.

You know how when people are bad mentally, some say they are in a "bad place right now," that seems related to this. They are saying that, they'll be at "peace". By peace, they mean their torture will be over. Whether they believe their consciousness will continue after the final exit, is a separate issue. The primary hypothesis among the community is that consciousness fades, or goes into "nothingness." Yes, you could go into a land where you will be tortured by ogres, but it's not been proven, so why believe that?

Sure and if you're the pope and burned thousands of people alive, raped children and stole peoples money you will go to the magic happy place where elves suck your dick and there's an unlimited supply of cheetos and pints.

And you will meet all the good christians, like the neighbor who called the police on you once because you mowed your lawn on a sunday and you will have to talk to him for eternity without the option of killing yourself anymore. And this is, imo, the reason why souls re-incarnate, because they just can't take it anymore to be in heaven with these glib assholes, so they'd rather come back down to earth as a caterpillar or a somalian child soldier plagued by malaria and shingles.

 

[Dear Flabby]

Many folks on SS wrote that they don't believe in hell after death because the hot water they're in right now is already hell, that earth as we know it is already a living hell, that they're in a hell of their own making, that life is worse than any hell they could have imagined, etc. These reasons pop up again and again. Also, people post "you'll be in a better place soon" or something along that line on goodbye threads quite often.

Since nobody really knows what happens after death, nobody knows how CTB affects afterlife or the next life if there's one, and nobody has the whole picture of the objective reality, how do they make that leap of faith and believe they can't end up in a worse place than they're in right now?

There are "known unknowns" and "unknown unknowns." Known unknowns are the questions we humans have raised but haven't found answers to. The unknown unknowns are the questions that nobody has even thought of asking yet - just like ants never wonder why quantum mechanics can't reconcile with general relativity. Due to the unknown unknowns, I'm forced to look at CTB from a risk management perspective. I've always been agnostic - I can't find enough empirical evidence to be 100% certain of anything but also can't discount any possibilities.

The situation that anybody is in seems can always get worse. Not to be pessimistic, but when my understanding of reality and the universe is limited, I'd have to consider the worst scenario and determine whether it's a state of existence I can bear. As a random example, what if "souls" do exist and can get stuck in a perpetual state of going through the agony of, say, being skinned alive if they died by CTB? That sounds worse than any form of disability, homelessness, poverty, losing loved ones.

So, do those folks romanticize or sugarcoat the unknown because such wishful thinking makes death more palatable? Or to strengthen the belief that CTB is a permanent solution to their problems? Or is it just a figure of speech for saying "my life sucks?"

Do they actually believe that the person who's about to CTB will be in a better place soon or is it like people saying "everything is gonna be fine" when they're in fact clueless and scared IRL? Or is it like saying a prayer?

Fear of the unknown is the hurdle I've been failing to jump over and deters me from "pulling the CTB trigger," so it baffles me how "the grass is greener on the other side" assumption caught on and became pervasive on SS. I wonder if it has to do with the manifestation of a common neurosis that dubious reasoning becomes more legitimate when more people with the same reasoning pile on, or if it's an example of people bias their interpretation of evidence and experience toward what they desire (which is a tendency that has been explored and confirmed by psychological science studies). Or maybe I'm really missing something. Feel free to enlighten me.

I'm a bit "ranty" here. I apologize in advance.

I can't enlighten you, but my physical pain and cognitive decline makes me past the point of caring about the "Hell" described to me by "Christians". The one I am allegedly headed for. With no proof.

These same "Christians" treated my daughter badly as a child, ostracizing her at school and church, and encouraging their pious children to pile on.

So, they were convinced that they were headed straight for "Heaven" (Tm), and that's when I knew that I wanted to be where the kind people went, even if the temperature is allegedly a bit warm. They brought no proof of their goodness, or of their "Heaven"

Personally, I think that there is nothing after death, and if I am wrong, the "Christians" have done NOTHING to persuade me otherwise.

I am not sugarcoating anything. My body is so broken that I have ceased to care. My mind is losing ground fast.

At sunrise, after a pain ridden night, I wanted to jump 8 feet from our deck to our yard.
Not to CTB.
Just to have different pain points than the ones of the previous 12 hours.

So, whatever the afterlife brings, I am truly beyond worrying about it.

Once broken, broken, broken, I am in a place past fear.

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

Sure and if you're the pope and burned thousands of people alive, raped children and stole peoples money you will go to the magic happy place where elves suck your dick and there's an unlimited supply of cheetos and pints.

And you will meet all the good christians, like the neighbor who called the police on you once because you mowed your lawn on a sunday and you will have to talk to him for eternity without the option of killing yourself anymore. And this is, imo, the reason why souls re-incarnate, because they just can't take it anymore to be in heaven with these glib assholes, so they'd rather come back down to earth as a caterpillar or a somalian child soldier plagued by malaria and shingles.

What? Was that a disagreement? A joke? I didn't insinuate any of what you mention, if that's what you think.

 

[a.n.kirillov]

What? Was that a disagreement? A joke? I didn't insinuate any of what you mention, if that's what you think.

No not at all haha we are on the samepage. I just elaborated on your hell scenario with my own heaven (and hell) scenario because I thought the raped by ogres thing was funny.

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

No not at all haha we are on the samepage. I just elaborated on your hell scenario with my own heaven (and hell) scenario because I thought the raped by ogres thing was funny.

O okay, sorry haha. I was just making sure. But re-reading it, the lawn mower made me chuckle, so good job
All good lmao.

 

[262653]

The situation that anybody is in seems can always get worse. Not to be pessimistic, but when my understanding of reality and the universe is limited, I'd have to consider the worst scenario and determine whether it's a state of existence I can bear. As a random example, what if "souls" do exist and can get stuck in a perpetual state of going through the agony of, say, being skinned alive if they died by CTB? That sounds worse than any form of disability, homelessness, poverty, losing loved ones.

To be fair, for every shitty thing that might happen to us if we CTB, we can conjure up an equally shitty thing that will happen if we won't CTB (in this example: souls can get tortured for an eternity if they don't die by CTB). So as far as afterlife is concerned, I don't see why should it influence the decisions being made here.

 

[a.n.kirillov]

To be fair, for every shitty thing that might happen to us if we CTB, we can conjure an equally shitty thing that will happen if we won't CTB (in this example: souls can get tortured for an eternity if they don't die by CTB). So as far as afterlife is concerned, I don't see why should it influence the decisions being made here.

Well, if I knew for certain that by ctb ing I will go to hell and dying by natural causes will mean I go to heaven, I'd definitely stick it out.

 

[nitrogen]

Wait wait wait. Let's not fixate on the Christian notion of Heaven and Hell. What I mean by heaven is a state of not experiencing physical or mental pain, which encompasses the possibility of consciousness completely dissipates after we die. Hell is a place or state of existence with more pain than this life.

Speaking of God, it can be any higher power that has the ability to dictate human fate. If we follow this loose definition of God, it can be Type 5-7 civilizations on the Kardashev Scale, material beings that reside in higher dimensions, owners of brains in jars that are being fed false reality through electrode stimulation, players of a virtual reality simulation with you and me being game characters, etc.

Let's pick the brain in a jar hypothesis, say you CTB, your owner happens to be a control freak and isn't happy about you making a defiant and autonomous decision. He/she/it stimulates the brain circuits that control pain transmission and interpretation, then you can feel like you're being skinned alive. If each person is a brain in a separate jar, the owners/Gods can come in all different personalities. Maybe some brains that CTB" end up in heaven and some in hell.

The assumption that Gods are supposed to be omnipotent, benevolent, almighty is quite a stretch. That all humans are ruled by the same Gods is also a stretch.

See where I'm going with this?

 

[262653]

Well, if I knew for certain that by ctb ing I will go to hell and dying by natural causes will mean I go to heaven, I'd definitely stick it out.

Right. I overlooked the scenarios where we would have such certainties.

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

Wait wait wait. Let's not fixate on the Christian notion of Heaven and Hell. What I mean by heaven is a state of not experiencing physical or mental pain, which encompasses the possibility of consciousness completely dissipates after we die. Hell is a place or state of existence with more pain than this life.

Speaking of God, it can be any higher power that has the ability to dictate human fate. If we follow this loose definition of God, it can be Type 5-7 civilizations on the Kardashev Scale, material beings that reside in higher dimensions, owners of brains in jars that are being fed false reality through electrode stimulation, players of a virtual reality simulation with you and me being game characters, etc.

Let's pick the brain in a jar hypothesis, say you CTB, your owner happens to be a control freak and isn't happy about you making a defiant and autonomous decision. He/she/it stimulates the brain circuits that control pain transmission and interpretation, then you can feel like you're being skinned alive. If each person is a brain in a separate jar, the owners/Gods can come in all different personalities. Maybe some brains that CTB" end up in heaven and some in hell.

The assumption that Gods are supposed to be omnipotent, benevolent, almighty is quite a stretch. That all humans are ruled by the same Gods is also a stretch.

See where I'm going with this?

But you could use any reverse hypothesis, or insane hypothesis either. You don't worry about Big Foot when going the woods. We have to rely on our "subjective" experiences of reality, otherwise, we'd lose all productivity, worrying about insane "hypotheses". And, from my knowledge, we haven't found any evidence of the supernatural. My previous point still stands though.

My apologies for assuming that you were using the traditionalist views of heaven.

 

[a.n.kirillov]

Wait wait wait. Let's not fixate on the Christian notion of Heaven and Hell. What I mean by heaven is a state of not experiencing physical or mental pain, which encompasses the possibility of consciousness completely dissipates after we die. Hell is a place or state of existence with more pain than this life.

Speaking of God, it can be any higher power that has the ability to dictate human fate. If we follow this loose definition of God, it can be Type 5-7 civilizations on the Kardashev Scale, material beings that reside in higher dimensions, owners of brains in jars that are being fed false reality through electrode stimulation, players of a virtual reality simulation with you and me being game characters, etc.

Let's pick the brain in a jar hypothesis, say you CTB, your owner happens to be a control freak and isn't happy about you making a defiant and autonomous decision. He/she/it stimulates the brain circuits that control pain transmission and interpretation, then you can feel like you're being skinned alive. If each person is a brain in a separate jar, the owners/Gods can come in all different personalities. Maybe some brains that CTB" end up in heaven and some in hell.

The assumption that Gods are supposed to be omnipotent, benevolent, almighty is quite a stretch. That all humans are ruled by the same Gods is also a stretch.

See where I'm going with this?

okay well I would say were I to wake up as the brain in the jar or the matrix dude, I would prefer it because it is the truth. So I would definitely take the red pill. Your other scenario with the control freak being is too inprobable for me to consider in real life of course. Tbh it's an occams razor question for me.

 

[nitrogen]

But you could use any reverse hypothesis, or insane hypothesis either. You don't worry about Big Foot when going the woods. We have to rely on our "subjective" experiences of reality, otherwise, we'd lose all productivity, worrying about insane "hypotheses". And, from my knowledge, we haven't found any evidence of the supernatural. My previous point still stands though.

My apologies for assuming that you were using the traditionalist views of heaven.

If you look into research and studies in cognitive science from recent years, you'd find lots of evidence that suggest our subjective reality differs from the objective reality. Unfortunately, what happens to us after we die isn't defined or controlled by our subjective reality but the objective reality. Though, there are people who argue that the line between subjective and objective realities is blurry, that subjective reality can influence objective reality to some degree.

The evolution simulations that have been run again and again in biology labs suggest the species that see reality as it is always get wiped out by species that maximize fitness. There are mathematical equations of evolution with a bunch of variables that can be tweaked to simulate different hypothetical scenarios under controlled conditions. Creatures on earth rely on heuristics to be able to react quickly to environmental stimuli to maximize fitness. Some animal species have relied on the same heuristics and survived for millions of years, but there are plenty of examples to show how the heuristics can trick and fail them.

Some of those "insane hypothesis" are pure thought experiments, but some are supported by scientific evidence and logical reasoning.

Btw, whether life or any human productivity has meaning is another subject of debate. Albert Camus's (a Nobel Prize winner) writing kinda stuck in my head and I find it troublesome. He denies that there is an answer to a question that humans cannot escape asking, "What is the meaning of existence?" and rejects every scientific, teleological, metaphysical, or human-created end that would provide an adequate answer. This paradoxical situation between our impulse to ask ultimate questions and the impossibility of achieving any adequate answer is what Camus calls the absurd. If existence itself has no meaning, we must learn to bear an irresolvable emptiness. I'm not saying I agree with him, just intrigued by his astute observations and arguments.

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

If you look into research and studies in cognitive science from recent years, you'd find lots of evidence that suggest our subjective reality differs from the objective reality. Unfortunately, what happens to us after we die isn't defined or controlled by our subjective reality but the objective reality. Although, there are people who argue that the line between subjective and objective realities is blurry, that subjective reality can influence objective reality to some degree.

The evolution simulations that have been run again and again in biology labs suggest the species that see reality as it is always get wiped out by species that maximize fitness. There are equations of evolution with a bunch of variables that can be tweaked to simulate different hypothetical scenarios under controlled conditions. Creatures on earth rely on heuristics to be able to react quickly to environmental stimuli to maximize fitness. Some animal species have relied on the same heuristics and survived for millions of years, but there are plenty of examples to show how the heuristics can trick and fail them.

Some of those "insane hypothesis" are pure thought experiments, but some are supported by scientific evidence.

Not him. I can't say I disagree notably on anything you said. Heuristics can fail, of course. Intuition, educated guesses, etc, are not infallible by any measure. Humanity exploys them very often in their daily life, and they can be wrong. Afterall, you can't always know the most logical approach or decision to take. Our senses do alter things, food doesn't have an innate taste, objects are perceived differently by tons of species, etc.

Thought experiments are not bad, just when they are used as fact or justification when they don't hold merit. Anyways, let's just agree to disagree. I personally hold that there is a more justification for oblivion afterwords. I recognize I may be wrong, but there seems to be reasoning for the idea. And you disagree, perfectly fine. Good luck

 

[a.n.kirillov]

The evolution simulations that have been run again and again in biology labs suggest the species that see reality as it is always get wiped out by species that maximize fitness.

I'm not sure I get what you're saying and I haven't ever heard of these experiments. Could you provide a link to an article or something?

 

[SimplyTopHat]

I'm a bit "ranty" here. I apologize in advance.

I can't enlighten you, but my physical pain and cognitive decline makes me past the point of caring about the "Hell" described to me by "Christians". The one I am allegedly headed for. With no proof.

These same "Christians" treated my daughter badly as a child, ostracizing her at school and church, and encouraging their pious children to pile on.

So, they were convinced that they were headed straight for "Heaven" (Tm), and that's when I knew that I wanted to be where the kind people went, even if the temperature is allegedly a bit warm. They brought no proof of their goodness, or of their "Heaven"

Personally, I think that there is nothing after death, and if I am wrong, the "Christians" have done NOTHING to persuade me otherwise.

I am not sugarcoating anything. My body is so broken that I have ceased to care. My mind is losing ground fast.

At sunrise, after a pain ridden night, I wanted to jump 8 feet from our deck to our yard.
Not to CTB.
Just to have different pain points than the ones of the previous 12 hours.

So, whatever the afterlife brings, I am truly beyond worrying about it.

Once broken, broken, broken, I am in a place past fear.

As someone with chronic pain, I understand &share your sentiment.
It's easy to pass off the desire for pain to end as romanization when you cannot empathize with another's reasons for wanting to CTB.

 

[nitrogen]

I'm not sure I get what you're saying and I haven't ever heard of these experiments. Could you provide a link to an article or something?

This is a good article to get you started:

The Evolutionary Argument Against Reality | Quanta Magazine

The cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman believes that evolution and quantum mechanics conspire to make objective reality an illusion.

www.quantamagazine.org

There are a bunch of other journals and studies on a similar topic. I'll edit this post and add more content later today or tomorrow. I gotta go pick up my kid from daycare in 3 minutes.

 

[Justaroguegear]

If there is a higher being how can dishing out eternal torture for a lifetime of sin be rational? And if they're not rational how could they have the power to torture someone for eternity?

 

[a.n.kirillov]

Btw, whether life or any human productivity has meaning is another subject of debate. Albert Camus's (a Nobel Prize winner) writing kinda stuck in my head and I find it troublesome. He denies that there is an answer to a question that humans cannot escape asking, "What is the meaning of existence?" and rejects every scientific, teleological, metaphysical, or human-created end that would provide an adequate answer. This paradoxical situation between our impulse to ask ultimate questions and the impossibility of achieving any adequate answer is what Camus calls the absurd. If existence itself has no meaning, we must learn to bear an irresolvable emptiness. I'm not saying I agree with him, just intrigued by his astute observations and arguments.

Imo Camus and Nietzsche are brilliant in their analysis but they are horrible sadists when they try to justify existence.

Karim Akerma, a German antinatalist, coined (if I'm not mistaken here) the term Anthropodicy (as the necessary justification for the problem of evil after the death of God, and thus any question of a theodicy becoming meaningless) and that is essentially what Nietzsche and Camus are trying to do: to justify an evil and sadistic creation. Now Nietzsche does it by poetry and vagueness and the Ubermensch, Camus does it in a rather pitiful manner, by inserting a meaningless term that means nothing (rebellion).

Now I'm not sure whether or not to call them nihilists, since they both definitely saw value in suffering itself; and that is what I call sadism.

I was fascinated by Camus as well but always felt something was off about his ideas and it didn't really click for me until I came to an antinatalist stance. What I find repugnant in Nietzsche, Camus, Sartre is that they try to justify a cruel creation and solve the problem of evil with silly word games. At least Kierkegaard went the traditional route and admitted to a pseudo-faith in a god. I have much more respect for him.

Anyway, did anyone actually ask for my opinion on this? no but I was bored so feel free to ignore my late night ramblings lol
.

I think camus only got over these questions because he regularly had his dick sucked and had nice cars, nice clothes and a lot of money. I would have liked to see him "rebel" against autism, social rejection, poverty and so on. Gotta give Nietzsche that one, he was all of those things and still held on to his suffering-is-so-awesome thing; which just shows that he was a very sick man.

But alas, the times weren't ready for antinatalist ideas anyway. If you want a career as an intellectual you can't stray too far from the zeitgeist. But the truth will always prevail (as Schopenhauer hammered home so often) and I think pessimism and antinatalism will be the logical consequence of the death of God one day. Or not because the breeders breed them out of existence lol

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

Btw, whether life or any human productivity has meaning is another subject of debate. Albert Camus's (a Nobel Prize winner) writing kinda stuck in my head and I find it troublesome. He denies that there is an answer to a question that humans cannot escape asking, "What is the meaning of existence?" and rejects every scientific, teleological, metaphysical, or human-created end that would provide an adequate answer. This paradoxical situation between our impulse to ask ultimate questions and the impossibility of achieving any adequate answer is what Camus calls the absurd. If existence itself has no meaning, we must learn to bear an irresolvable emptiness. I'm not saying I agree with him, just intrigued by his astute observations and arguments.

In response to your edit; I haven't read it, but am very much familiar with sisyphus, pushing up the rock etc. The absurd has 3 approaches, suicide, religion, and acceptance. I've debated with meaning for a while internally. Meaning is sort of a concept that doesn't apply to the universe, unless you go for religion imo. I was speaking about what "most people" pride or strive for. Most people follow society's goal for success, which involves productivity and living a life aligned with society. I don't think it has "meaning," I'd say it is something that improves your quality of life. Money grants you medical access, luxury, no stressing about debt or purchases, etc. I feel nihilism personally led/can lead me to depression. It just removes my personal motivation. Which is why absurdism is sometimes called functional nihilism.

 

[a.n.kirillov]

In response to your edit; I haven't read it, but am very much familiar with sisyphus, pushing up the rock etc. The absurd has 3 approaches, suicide, religion, and acceptance. I've debated with meaning for a while internally. Meaning is sort of a concept that doesn't apply to the universe, unless you go for religion imo. I was speaking about what "most people" pride or strive for. Most people follow society's goal for success, which involves productivity and living a life aligned with society. I don't think it has "meaning," I'd say it is something that improves your quality of life. Money grants you medical access, luxury, no stressing about debt or purchases, etc. I feel nihilism personally led/can lead me to depression. It just removes my personal motivation. Which is why absurdism is sometimes called functional nihilism.

If I strike your hand with a hammer, isn't that inherently meaningful to you?

Edit well I totally misread your comment. I agree we cannot apply the concept of meaning to the universe (by asking "what is the meaning of the universe"). But I would say objective meaning still exists within it. The question "what is the meaning within the universe" makes sense to me and is answerable.

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

If I strike your hand with a hammer, isn't that inherently meaningful to you?

You can have subject feelings about concepts, actions, and still feel pain. I feel pain, I instinctively pull back my hand, then I'll yell at you. It is in my best physical interest. You can have subjective meaning, as long as you recognize it is subjective/personal and not objective. This puts it better than I can; "Yes, though it must face up to the Absurd, which means embracing the transient, personal nature of our meaning-making projects and the way they are nullified by death" The difference between it and existentialism is subtle.

And then I would seek revenge

 

[a.n.kirillov]

You can have subject feelings about concepts, actions, and still feel pain. I feel pain, I instinctively pull back my hand, then I'll yell at you. It is in my best physical interest. You can have subjective meaning, as long as you recognize it is subjective/personal and not objective. This puts it better than I can; "Yes, though it must face up to the Absurd, which means embracing the transient, personal nature of our meaning-making projects and the way they are nullified by death" The difference between it and existentialism is subtle.

And then I would seek revenge

Well at least pain/ suffering is a universal value

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

Edit well I totally misread your comment. I agree we cannot apply the concept of meaning to the universe (by asking "what is the meaning of the universe"). But I would say objective meaning still exists within it. The question "what is the meaning within the universe" makes sense to me and is answerable.

And what would the objective meaning be to you if you don't mind me asking?

 

[a.n.kirillov]

And what would the objective meaning be to you if you don't mind me asking?

Sorry Im not sure whether I would call it objective I will have to take this back.

What I don't like is when people suggest that value is subjective and really mean it is arbitrary/ relative (while I think pain is universally meaningful to feeling subjects), that's why I call it objective sometimes but clearly I haven't got my terms straight on this.

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

Sorry Im not sure whether I would call it objective I will have to take this back.

What I don't like is when people suggest that value is subjective and really mean it is arbitrary/ relative (while I think pain is universally meaningful to feeling subjects), that's why I call it objective sometimes but clearly I haven't got my terms straight on this.

Alright, fair enough. Doesn't seem to be any disagreement. No one likes pain-asides from masochists-it's not something to like afterall.

 

[Life sucks]

Everyone believes in different things and thats it. There is no proof and no conclusion could be made. Does anyone know the whole past and how those concepts been made? We can't because of the limitations of a human life but that doesn't mean we can't think and find a contradiction or a fault. Everything that a human could think of is a human construct (with the exception of mathematical, logical or independent objects) which makes everything falls on the "known unknown". If hell is "unknown unknown", humans would never conceptualize it and its not only hell, but every possible thing. If one human is capable of thinking about something, then whatever they think about actually is a human construct. Not to mention how humans are actually bound by natural languages. What is life? Afterlife? Death? Worse? Better? and endless questions without definitive answers. There are no complete definitions and answers so whatever we say is incomplete or contains some contradictions. The whole argument of "afterlife" or any similar thing is a human construct. All humans constructs are actually self-contradictory because the logic is based on the whole world/universe and not one human being. So its like a mental prison, you'll always fall into contradictions (with the sole exception when one chooses nothing) but you'll believe in something and continue. There is no sugarcoating or anything, they believe there is nothing and some believe there is something. Can one blame them? No, the current life is absurd and inherently flawed and everyone is a victim of it. Just believe and go the path you want. What happens next is another story that we can't do anything about it.

 

[marcusuk63]

In most carse all you have to do to avoid going to hell is change to one of the other 3,000 religions