Venting I wish all the human species suddenly died.

[AliceTheGoon]

I saw a video of a hippo being eaten by a pride of lions the other day - the hippo's neck is so fat that they couldn't suffocate it, like they do with impalas, so they just ate it alive - it took 20 to 30 mins to stop screaming in pain - should we wipe out all the lion species, as well as the human species?

They cut out what led up to that. The hippo called the lions a pride parade.

 

[HopefulButPrepared]

I personally think so, yes. Just eliminate all life. Suffering may eventually re-emerge if we allow life anywhere

so the problem isn't just with life then, it's with the existence of a universe, because it seems that life emerges from universes, it's part of their purpose, probably - I don't believe life emerging from a universe is an accident

 

[Superdeterminist]

so the problem isn't just with life then, it's with the existence of a universe, because it seems that life emerges from universes, it's part of their purpose, probably - I don't believe life emerging from a universe is an accident

Yes. Eliminate the universe. This one at least. We can imagine an alternative universe where suffering doesn't exist. But apparently this was the only option and suffering was necessary...Just a horribly cruel fact, and now we have to experience the consequences.

 

[HopefulButPrepared]

Yes. Eliminate the universe. This one at least. We can imagine an alternative universe where suffering doesn't exist. But apparently this was the only option and suffering was necessary...Just a horribly cruel fact, and now we have to experience the consequences.

I think, when we start saying stuff like 'there shouldn't be universes', we really don't know what we are talking about, because we don't even know what a universe is as yet, how many there are, how much life is in each one, or even in each galaxy. In order for good outcomes to exist, there must be bad outcomes, to relate or compare the good outcome to. So now we're just saying, if I can't be happy, then no one should, which is a tad bitter and twisted and self-pitying. There are lots of happy people who enjoy their lives. I know my life is the way it is, primarily because I fucked up, but also because my parents fucked up somewhat. Why are there 3 year olds dying of cholera in Africa? It can't be their fault, or their parents. But probably because someone fucked up, or someone prioritised themselves over others; some kind of selfishness or corruption, maybe. All I know is I live in one of the most successful countries on the planet, or probably the most successful ever, if you look at what came out of the UK. And I squandered so many opportunities that were open to me. If anyone should have it good, it should be me, seeing as where I was born, and I still managed to fuck it up. I don't even know what I'm talking about anymore. I'm just typing because I'm bored. The tennis final isn't as much fun as I thought it would be. I might pop an Oxy, go for a drive, and buy some junk-food. What an insult to the starving people of this planet, that I can do that, for fun, because I'm bored!

 

[Alex6216]

because we don't even know what a universe is as yet

Yes we do. The universe is simply the region of space in which galaxies exist in, that's it. It's the equivalent of a petri-dish which contains bacterial colonies (in this analogy, the colony would be galaxies)

 

[HopefulButPrepared]

Yes we do. The universe is simply the region of space in which galaxies exist in, that's it. It's the equivalent of a petri-dish which contains bacterial colonies (in this analogy, the colony would be galaxies)

You better phone Cern, tell them to shut down the Large Hadron Collider, because you figured it out. Shame to waste all that electricity if there's no need.

We don't even know exactly what a 'region of space' is made of yet...

Cern physicists find evidence of three new ‘exotic’ particles

‘The more analyses we perform, the more kinds of exotic hadrons we find’

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Superdeterminist]

I think, when we start saying stuff like 'there shouldn't be universes', we really don't know what we are talking about, because we don't even know what a universe is as yet, how many there are, how much life is in each one, or even in each galaxy.

We don't need to know precisely the nature of it. It's just my opinion that nothingness would be better than what we have. The best perfect lives don't justify the bad ones, IMO.

In order for good outcomes to exist, there must be bad outcomes, to relate or compare the good outcome to.

I don't know if this is a real law of nature. If it indeed is, then I would rather such a nature not exist.

 

[houseofleaves]

I personally think so, yes. Just eliminate all life

And no more trees? No more butterflies?… No more sparrows and such?…

 

[Alex6216]

You better phone Cern, tell them to shut down the Large Hadron Collider, because you figured it out. Shame to waste all that electricity if there's no need.

We don't even know exactly what a 'region of space' is made of yet...

Cern physicists find evidence of three new ‘exotic’ particles

‘The more analyses we perform, the more kinds of exotic hadrons we find’

www.independent.co.uk

That doesn't have anything to do with the definition of the universe. That involves investigating the laws of physics which applies to our universe.
It would've made more sense to say we don't know how this universe works or how the laws of physics works.

 

[Hope:-)]

Noooooo...I love people :-)

 

[HopefulButPrepared]

We don't need to know precisely the nature of it. It's just my opinion that nothingness would be better than what we have. The best perfect lives don't justify the bad ones, IMO.


I don't know if this is a real law of nature. If it indeed is, then I would rather such a nature not exist.

I'm not talking about the best perfect lives. Most people I know don't want to die, and have enough enjoyment in their lives to justify sticking around for the duration of the average human life, despite knowing that most people die in a state of pain and spend the last few in a state of misery, according to them. But you want to wipe all of them out because it didn't turn out very good for you? And before admin get involved, I'm not stating an opinion on whether you should stick around or not, we're talking about wiping everyone and every living thing out! This is no different to the anti-abortionists wanting to stop everyone having one. Live or die by your standards, but don't expect everyone else to.

I had some nice junk food by the way - I parked down by the river, where hundreds of people were enjoying themselves, swimming, paddle-boarding, kids having water-gun fights, all laughing and enjoying being together as families. You wanna wipe all of them out because you're having a tough time?

I'm not even particularly invested in this argument, and I'm not trying to cause trouble - I'm just bored really - feel free to not reply!

That doesn't have anything to do with the definition of the universe. That involves investigating the laws of physics which applies to our universe.
It would've made more sense to say we don't know how this universe works or how the laws of physics works.

No, they're investigating what it's made of. We don't yet know what protons and the other things that make-up atoms are made of. Which is what makes up 'regions of space'. That's what they're investigating.

 

[Superdeterminist]

And no more trees? No more butterflies?… No more sparrows and such?…

All of it. Although just a hunch, I suspect that this whole system of the universe is interdependent in ways we can't see. I don't know if butterflies can suffer, but I wouldn't take the risk by preserving them. I think that trees probably don't suffer, so in principle I would be fine with e.g. just trees existing in isolation...but who really cares if there's nothing conscious around to observe any of it

I'm not talking about the best perfect lives. Most people I know don't want to die, and have enough enjoyment in their lives to justify sticking around for the duration of the average human life, despite knowing that most people die in a state of pain and spend the last few in a state of misery, according to them. But you want to wipe all of them out because it didn't out very good for you? And before admin get involved, I'm not stating an opinion on whether you should stick around or not, we're talking about wiping everyone and every living thing out! This is no different to the anti-abortionists wanting to stop everyone having one. Live or die by your standards, but expect everyone else to.

I had some nice junk food by the way - I parked down by the river, where hundreds of people were enjoying themselves, swimming, paddle-boarding, kids having water-gun fights, all laughing and enjoying being together as families. You wanna wipe all of them out because you're having a tough time?

I'm not even particularly invested in this argument, and I'm not trying to cause trouble - I'm just bored really - feel free to not reply!

No, they're investigating what it's made of. We don't yet know what protons and the other things that make-up atoms are made of. Which is what makes up 'regions of space'. That's what they're investigating.

I'm not interested in getting any admin involved, we're just talking. I'm just saying choosing between this universe (which necessitates egregious suffering) and nothingness, then nothingness wins. Sure, keeping this universe but just removing all the suffering would be better, but then it's no longer this universe, so that's a different question.

 

[HopefulButPrepared]

All of it. Although just a hunch, I suspect that this whole system of the universe is interdependent in ways we can't see. I don't know if butterflies can suffer, but I wouldn't take the risk by preserving them. I think that trees probably don't suffer, so in principle I would be fine with e.g. just trees existing in isolation...but who really cares if there's nothing conscious around to observe any of it

I'm not interested in getting any admin involved, we're just talking. I'm just saying choosing between this universe (which necessitates egregious suffering) and nothingness, then nothingness wins. Sure, keeping this universe but just removing all the suffering would be better, but then it's no longer this universe, so that's a different question.

I'm no expert, but I think the way that life works, is that life tries to adapt to avoid suffering, otherwise 'life' would just sit around on it's ass all day doing nothing! So the potential for suffering is necessary to motivate life to do stuff to avoid it. It's like the basis of life itself is to try not to die, or suffer on the way towards dying. But sometimes, the suffering is unavoidable, and is inescapable, and some life dies, and some survives, and that's the basis for adaptation and evolution. So I don't think you can have life, without suffering, or the potential of it. A biologist would probably read this and say, 'Well duh!'

 

[Superdeterminist]

I'm no expert, but I think the way that life works, is that life tries to adapt to avoid suffering, otherwise 'life' would just sit around on it's ass all day doing nothing! So the potential for suffering is necessary to motivate life to do stuff to avoid it. It's like the basis of life itself is to try not to die, or suffer on the way towards dying. But sometimes, the suffering is unavoidable, and is inescapable, and some life dies, and some survives, and that's the basis for adaptation and evolution. So I don't think you can have life, without suffering, or the potential of it. A biologist would probably read this and say, 'Well duh!'

I don't know what life's ultimate agenda is, but if it's aiming to avoid suffering, it's doing an abysmal job, because suffering is rife and has been throughout recorded history. Maybe there is no life without suffering, who can say. If so, then my preference is simply for there to be no life at all.

 

[Resinn66]

I dream about an extinction event. It will be a blessing if we all die instantly

 

[hellispink]

That would be lovely. There is nothing more rotten, selfish, and inhumane than this species.

 

[HopefulButPrepared]

I don't know what life's ultimate agenda is, but if it's aiming to avoid suffering, it's doing an abysmal job, because suffering is rife and has been throughout recorded history. Maybe there is no life without suffering, who can say. If so, then my preference is simply for there to be no life at all.

Or maybe suffering is the main requirement for the motivation to try to survive, and adapt accordingly. So the ultimate agenda is to adapt. 200 years ago, something like 50% of all children died before 12 or something, at least in Western countries, and that has been drastically reduced by our motivation to avoid suffering.

To be honest though, purely selfishly, I'd love Putin to drop a huge nuke on the UK - it would certainly save me all this hassle, figuring out how to end my life myself, and it would take out the couple of people I feel guilt for.

 

[Resinn66]

If we are the only intelligent living species in our galaxy that has had the great fortune of finding the "perfect" planet... well better not to think about it

 

[pthnrdnojvsc]

so the problem isn't just with life then, it's with the existence of a universe, because it seems that life emerges from universes, it's part of their purpose, probably - I don't believe life emerging from a universe is an accident

Around 3.5-4 billion years ago a molecule became able to replicate itself.That molecule is DNA. Then 500 million years ago DNA and evolution invented a brain and nervous system that can suffer extreme pain

Every human alive today will be dead in 130 years. A human is just a blip in time . DNA based life ( Life), the earth , and the universe will end anyway . The Sun will burn the Earth in a few million or few billion years . Just one thing that shows this is that the universe has always expanded and the rate of expansion is accellerating so imo the universe will expand to nothingness.

i do think life is an accident i don't believe in any intelligent design What's the purpose of life or any programer intellignt designer, what is the objective meaning of life.i think life is meaningless.

Accelerating expansion of the universe - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[HopefulButPrepared]

Around 3.5-4 billion years ago a molecule became able to replicate itself.That molecule is DNA. Then 500 million years ago DNA and evolution invented a brain and nervous system that can suffer extreme pain

Every human alive today will be dead in 130 years. A human is just a blip in time . DNA based life ( Life), the earth , and the universe will end anyway . The Sun will burn the Earth in a few million or few billion years . Just one thing that shows this is that the universe has always expanded and the rate of expansion is accellerating so imo the universe will expand to nothingness.

i do think life is an accident i don't believe in any intelligent design What's the purpose of life or any programer intellignt designer, what is the objective meaning of life.i think life is meaningless.

Roger Penrose disagrees, and claims to have solid evidence that there was a time before the universe, and that it has a life cycle, so it continues to cycle in some way, goes back to a little miniscule state, and then expands again.

Personally, and I'm no expert, I think the idea of life being an accident is a ridiculous idea. As Alan Watts put it, apple trees grow apples, and planets grow people! I suspect this is something we will discover to be true at some point in the very distant future. But what do I know? Maybe it's more like galaxies grow people.