Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

PlanetSpores.ca
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Injection Grain Bag

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
The true purpose of humanity
    #1632214 -

It is hard to find true meaning in life where people can only explain life by means of dogma, myth, and simple rationalizations. What is the true purpose of life on this planet?

Through my analyzation of life and what our true purpose could acually be I have finally come to some conclusions of true our purpose as a species on this planet. First, I believe we are not here strictly for our own happiness and pleasure. This is nowhere near a purpose for existence. It is also no coincidence that everything pleasurable is potentially addictive and destructive. Not to say we should not seek pleasure but to say that there is an equalibrium that needs to be maintained.

Second, I found that humans are distinctly different from other creatures and are capable of self-reflection for good reason, for everything has true purpose or why would it even exist. Does anyone actually realize how much had to go exactly right for anything at all to exist in the cosmic void we call space? This was meant to happen and for good reason. The ultimate reason.

The expenditure of matter in the universe is currently explained by the Big Bang. The formation of the planets is currently explained by the Nebular Hypothesis. But, read these and other theories all you want, you will not get any insight into the what could be our true purpose and reason for being.

I believe we are able to self-reflect because we are consciousness evolved. Every living thing has consciousness to some degree, even life that has no brain. The brain is simply the tool consciousness manipulates in order to control a physical body and interact with a physical world, a from of true telekinesis. As life evolved from single-celled organisms, consciousness evolved too, into different and more efficient life-forms. Theses life-forms get weeded out by the survival of the fittest and continue to change.

Would you like to see proof of the intelligence of nature? Here is one of many examples; I have a California Kingsnake as a pet. This pet was captive bred and obtained by me as a hatchling. Kingsnakes have the defense mechanism to mimick rattlesnakes when threatened. They shake their tail violently exactly like a rattlesnake does, only they do not possess a rattle. My snake was captive bred. It has never encountered a rattlesnake in its' entire life, but yet it knows how to mimick one perfectly. I seriously doubt that the snake consciously knows that it is mimicking a rattlesnake. How could it, it has never encountered one. Nature designed this defence and chose to instill it in the brain of the kingsnake because they closely resemble rattlesnakes and other poisonous snakes, but are not themselves poisonous and have little defence against preditors. There is no other logical explanation for this to possibly happen unless nature really has consciousness. There are millions of examples of this in nature, this is only one.

We as human beings are far different than any other life-form on this earth showing us that we have a purpose all our own. We evolved at the time we did for good reason. We are consciousness evolved and now have been given the chance to liberate our mind (our branch of consciousness). This is the greatest gift that we can possess. We can even utilyze anything we need from nature and have the gift to create anything we need that nature does not directly provide (like your car). But, instead of trying to acheive this purpose most people choose to remain ignorant to this and only seek vain desires instead of trying to acheive our ultimate purpose. What other purpose could we truely have? Does anyone really believe that be could one day travel to another world light-years away or something equally prepostorous? There is a cosmic speed limit. No matter can travel faster than light for a reason and all attempts to get by this will be futile. The answers we seek are within and not in the physical world. Even if we could somehow get around to another world, we will surely wipe out ourselves and possibly the whole planet before that technology would ever be established.

Ultimately, humanity as a species of life and our planet, will eventually meet demise like everything in the cosmic universe. But while you are living in this world you possess the greatest gift of all, the chance to acheive liberation and move to higher realms of existence where your mind will no longer suffer.

All matter in the universe gets recycled and is connected in one way of another. To believe that the mind does not is naive and foolish.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: PsycheStudent]
    #1632221 -


You must be new here.


Good post, but this is like kindergarden stuff in this forum. :wink:


--------------------
What if everything around you
Isn't quite as it seems?
What if all the world you think you know,
Is an elaborate dream?
And if you look at your reflection,
Is it all you want it to be?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Murex]
    #1632331 -

awsome post!, nothing wrong with going back to the basics :laugh:


--------------------
What fun is it in Nirvana while other beings are suffering?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: soylent_green]
    #1632341 -

Thanks you. I felt that this needed to be said in order to give insight to anyone who was interested.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: PsycheStudent]
    #1632662 -

i liked it and i usually dont read anything that long on here. i got one beef with you tho what makes you think that we will never be able to travel faster than light? cause einstein said so? that doesnt mean anything when man first decided to break the speed of sound they didnt know what would happen they thought maybe when you hit it your plane would blow up like it hit a wall or barrier that is why they called it the speed barrier well that was obviously wrong. and whos to say that the speed of light is absolute? even now as i type this there are very smart men and women working on the varible speed of light theory. then there is the folded space theory and many others also remember that einsteins theory of relativity is just that a theory. theorys arent proven so it works for our take on physics now but probly will be redesigned or improved on in just a few hundred years. if i was a betting man your damn right that id put my money down for man to walk on a new planet orbiting a new star. unfortunately i wont be there to see it.

i think our reson in life, our purpose, is simply being. you see we are here for a purpose and its one we as humans will never know. that said all we can do is live and die. but you cant live life looking for an answer because youll never find one. you can live your life for what it is an experiance. in the words of van wilder "dont take life to seriously...or you wont make it out alive"

blaze2


--------------------
"Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame." Albert Einstein

"peace is not maintained through force it is acheived through intelligence." Albert Einstein

"Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."
Thomas Jefferson

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: blaze2]
    #1632755 -

Heh Murex..  now now..  don't go chasing him away already! :wink:


--------------------
No one knows the worth of innocence till he knows it is gone forever, and that money can't buy it back. Not the saint, but the sinner that repenteth, is he to whom the full length and breadth, and height and depth, of life's meaning is revealed. Good and evil loose all objective meaning and are seen as equally necessary and contrasting elements in the masterpiece that is the universe.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: nubious]
    #1632805 -

I think i understand everything now.

The universe is a continually expanding and evolving system. It is more chaotic and more complex now, than it was yesterday or 1 second ago. In the beginning there was perfection, complete order. Then something happened. It started getting more chaotic and it hasn't stopped since. I read somewhere that it was 15 billion years ago.
It isn't a sensible question to ask what the meaning of it is, because looking for a purpose is just an evolved instinctual human reaction to find out what things are for and how they can be used. What can i use the universe for? Anything. Everything. There is no purpose, it just is.

Edited by Clear_Windowpane (06/14/03 08:14 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: PsycheStudent]
    #1632855 -

Good post and well-written.

You convey your thoughts rather clearly. I especially like the example of the California Kingsnake. I find animal instincts to be a really fascinating field of biology. The examples of a spider who knows exactly how to build a web, or a bird who knows exactly how to build a nest, are good ones as well. I just think it's so neat that specific knowledge and information can actually be passed on through the genes.

I wonder why humans have no instincts, though. We are a very social animal, completely dependent on others for our survival. Maybe we will develop instincts and such as a result of the rapid "consciousness evolution" that many people say is taking place. Perhaps instincts are not really passed down through genes, but instead the spider knows how to build his web because spiders have already undergone some sort of consciousness evolution? Who knows...

Peace,

RebelSteve


--------------------
Namaste.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: RebelSteve33]
    #1632865 -

What do you mean humans have no instincts? We have loads of them. The two most obvious ones are the most important for our survival, this is 'grasping' and 'suckling'...you know, grab the boob, suck on it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: zee_werp]
    #1632879 -

True, I agree that grasping and sucking are instincts that we have. However, the mother still has to place her baby at her breast and assist it in suckling, so this behavior is almost learned in a way.

In reply to we have loads of them, though, I completely disagree. In fact, grasping and sucking are the only true instincts we have, that I can think of. I am interested to hear what other instincts you think we have, though, because this is something that I've thought about a lot.

Peace,

RebelSteve


--------------------
Namaste.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: PsycheStudent]
    #1632938 -

"I am the Lorax, I speak for the trees!!! - - I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues, and I'm asking you sir at the top of my lungs....."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: PsycheStudent]
    #1632979 -

PsycheStudent writes:

First, I believe we are not here strictly for our own happiness and pleasure.

Why do you believe this? By what process did you come to this conclusion?

...everything has true purpose...

Unproven and unprovable. Existence need have no purpose or justification.

...or why would it even exist.

Invalid question. The question assumes that existence cannot occur randomly. Existence exists. There need be no "why" behind it.

This was meant to happen and for good reason.

Proof, please.

The ultimate reason.

Which is?

But, read these and other theories all you want, you will not get any insight into the what could be our true purpose and reason for being.

Perhaps because there is neither purpose nor reason for it.

I believe we are able to self-reflect because we are consciousness evolved.

If you mean that self-reflection is possible only to conscious entities, is that not self-evident?

Every living thing has consciousness to some degree, even life that has no brain.

Even if this were true (and there is no evidence that it is), this does not mean that every living thing is capable of self-reflection.

We as human beings are far different than any other life-form on this earth...

Correct.

... showing us that we have a purpose all our own.

This does not logically follow at all. Pure speculation.

We evolved at the time we did for good reason.

Proof, please. And by the way, what is this "good reason" you keep alluding to?

Even if we could somehow get around to another world, we will surely wipe out ourselves and possibly the whole planet before that technology would ever be established.

Speculation with no shred of supporting argument.

But while you are living in this world you possess the greatest gift of all, the chance to acheive liberation...

Liberation from what?

... and move to higher realms of existence...

How?

... where your mind will no longer suffer.

Why do you presume my mind is suffering now?

All matter in the universe gets recycled and is connected in one way of another. To believe that the mind does not is naive and foolish.

What you assert regarding matter may be true. Why do you presume the mind is a material object?

pinky


--------------------

Edited by pinksharkmark (06/14/03 11:02 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Phred]
    #1633024 -

I think it is just as much possible that we have a divine purpose than if we have no purpose at all.

You are quick to debunk his claims, but you can't offer any proof of your own.

There's the whole "burden of proof" thing, but I don't see that either side holds more weight.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: RebelSteve33]
    #1633031 -

Quote:
In reply to we have loads of them, though, I completely disagree. In fact, grasping and sucking are the only true instincts we have, that I can think of. I am interested to hear what other instincts you think we have, though, because this is something that I've thought about a lot.


Well one instinct I can think of is the "flight or fight" instinct. This is where our mind automatically responds to some sort of stimuli and decides whether to run, fight, or just stand still. Of course, sometimes this instinct can be either over-developed and hyper-sensitive, or even non-existant.

I think one of the things that distingushes us from other animals is we can question our instincts and change them.


--------------------
The very nature of experience is ineffable; it transcends cognitive thought and intellectualized analysis. To be without experience is to be without an emotional knowledge of what the experience translates into. The desire for the understanding of what life is made of is the motivation that drives us all. Without it, in fear of the experiences what life can hold is among the greatest contradictions; to live in fear of death while not being alive.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: PsycheStudent]
    #1633034 -

The purpose of human life on the planet Earth is to constantly learn and evolve, emotionally, physically, mentally, and spiritually, through constant life experience.


That is one of them anyway.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Twirling]
    #1633036 -

That is not an instinct by definition.  It is something we learn.

Infants do not recognize anything as threatening or dangerous.  As we age, we learn to see different things in these terms, and then learn to either fight or take flight from them.

In reply to

"I think one of the things that distingushes us from other animals is we can question our instincts and change them."

What instincts???    :confused:


--------------------
Namaste.

Edited by RebelSteve33 (06/14/03 11:46 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Grav]
    #1633096 -

Grav writes:

You are quick to debunk his claims, but you can't offer any proof of your own.

I need not. He is the one asserting that there is some "purpose" to life (although he never gets around to naming this purpose), the burden of proof is his. He provides nothing but opinion, belief, arbitrary assertion and speculation.

I am not "debunking" his claim, I am asking that he provide at least an iota of supporting evidence for it, or at the very least that he tell us what the "purpose" actually is.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: PsycheStudent]
    #1633156 -

gee it looks like everybody around here has got everything figured out pretty nicely.


--------------------
Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me.
In addition: SHPONGLE

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Strumpling]
    #1633217 -

I agree with pinksharkmark. You can't make statements like these without proof. All pinksharkmark was doing is breaking down his theory. All these people that claim to know the "truth" should go and start their own church's, at least then they could make some money off of this bullshit.

That being said, I don't discount either possibility. I'm just highly skeptical of someone who does.

RebelSteve33 - I believe basic emotions are instinctual. Happiness, distress (has a varied range (fear, discomfort, anger, etc.))


--------------------
I keep it real because I think it is important that a highly esteemed individual such as myself keep it real lest they experience the dreaded spontaneous non-existance of no longer keeping it real. - Hagbard Celine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: HagbardCeline]
    #1633338 -

Sorry, pinkshark, I was sort of going into my own little argument there of purpose vs. no purpose from a fundamental perspective. (is that the right way to say it?)

I see that you were responding to a post that went into a more detailed view of purpose.

All apologies for not reading very carefully!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Shroomism]
    #1633383 -

The purpose of human life on the planet Earth is to constantly evolve... physically.

Umm, old age and death is sort of a physical devolution if you will, otherwise 80 year-olds would be dominating sports.



--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Grav]
    #1633402 -

Pink Shark Mark - I am not "debunking" his claim, I am asking that he provide at least an iota of supporting evidence for it, or at the very least that he tell us what the "purpose" actually is.

I think this post was orignially just a pure arbitrary speculation about the possibility of a purpose of life through the author's own perceptions, rather than a realization of such a truth universally....so there is really no utility in breaking down his argument...it does not adhere to a philosophical logicality so why analyze it with one.

Let the guy speak his two cents without being barraged by your "philo-major" discourse - obviously derivative of your vast wealth of numinous wisdom. Enlighten me, oh ominous mentor :wink:

Really though, the guy is probably just cultivating his passion for these questions...the questions that get all of those interested in philosophy to embrace the highest form of science.....the questions of life. He's trying to soar like a bird into the infinitisemal skies of 'the love of wisdom'....please....do not shoot him down.

Peace,
i&I

Edited by 3MJ3 (06/14/03 03:58 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: 3MJ3]
    #1633526 -

Thanks 3MJ3,  that's what I wanted to say but didn't know how to say it :smile:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Swami]
    #1633563 -

Quote:
Umm, old age and death is sort of a physical devolution if you will, otherwise 80 year-olds would be dominating sports.


By old age and death you are beyond evolving physically and are more focused on emotionally, mentally, and spiritually, eh?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Shroomism]
    #1633573 -

mmmm, most be devolve mentally in their old age, and how would you gauge emotional/spiritual evolution


--------------------
enjoy the entertaining indentity i have constructed for you while you can.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Grav]
    #1633578 -

purpose of life = big big big party at the end of time that never ends that everyone makes it to. not the ubermensch, but the uber-party.

as for instincts.... two prominent ones come to mind. smoking weed and running from the po po.



--------------------
The ultimate meaning of our being can only be fulfilled in the paradoxical leap beyond the tragic-demonic frustration. It is a leap from our side, but it is the self-surrendering presence of the Ground of Being from the other side.
- Paul Tillich

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Malachi]
    #1633581 -

purpose of life: to make witty remarks like "the purpose of life is to debate the purpose of life".


--------------------
enjoy the entertaining indentity i have constructed for you while you can.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: atomikfunksoldier]
    #1633589 -

life has no meaning. It is like a truck

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Dogomush]
    #1633596 -

dog-o-mush, you just dont understand yet. you need to do more mushrooms and open up your 3rd eye. then you will understand that the meaning of life is to make up a meaning for life and cheat naive people into believing you so that they will give you money and have sex with you.


--------------------
enjoy the entertaining indentity i have constructed for you while you can.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: atomikfunksoldier]
    #1633705 -

I started laughing and then I slumped my shoulders and hung my head because it's true.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: 3MJ3]
    #1633924 -

3MJ3 writes:

Let the guy speak his two cents...

He spoke his two cents, as did a number of other people commenting on his assertions. So did I. Why are my comments singled out for your disapproval? Is there some unwritten rule here that one may only slavishly agree with what is written? Questions are not allowed?

...without being barraged by your "philo-major" discourse...

I thought I was in the "Spirituality and Philosophy" forum. Am I not allowed to ask for clarification of his personal philosophy?

...obviously derivative of your vast wealth of numinous wisdom.

What wisdom I do possess was not garnered by uncritically and unquestioningly swallowing everything I read. If something purporting to impart knew knowledge or wisdom cannot stand the test of a few relevant questions, of what worth is it?

Really though, the guy is probably just cultivating his passion for these questions...

Re-read his post, then mine. I am the one asking the questions, not him. He is the one who is making assertions.

He's trying to soar like a bird into the infinitisemal skies of 'the love of wisdom'....please....do not shoot him down.

Is it a favor to encourage him to pursue what may turn out to be false "wisdom"? What's wrong with suggesting a few course corrections to his flight through the skies? Why do you persist in calling my requests for clarification "shooting him down"?

pinky


--------------------

Edited by pinksharkmark (06/14/03 09:36 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Phred]
    #1634288 -

*Pinky tries hard to tell his colleagues about the colorful world outside the cave, but they instead lash out at him....*

hehehe


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: RebelSteve33]
    #1634311 -

Quote:
That is not an instinct by definition.  It is something we learn.

Infants do not recognize anything as threatening or dangerous.  As we age, we learn to see different things in these terms, and then learn to either fight or take flight from them.

In reply to

"I think one of the things that distingushes us from other animals is we can question our instincts and change them."

What instincts???    :confused:



I think we're getting into the "nature vs. nurture" debate. However, I think if you take an infant and make a loud noise, they will tend to cry, get upset, and/or be frightened. That is an automatic response to a stressor alerting a person to potential danger. An infants cry is an instinctual way of alerting a mother it's in danger. These aren't things they're taught or learn.

I guess the best way to figure out what's instinctual and what's learned would be to study different cultures and ways of life and see what differs. Anyone up for some sociology?  :cool:


--------------------
The very nature of experience is ineffable; it transcends cognitive thought and intellectualized analysis. To be without experience is to be without an emotional knowledge of what the experience translates into. The desire for the understanding of what life is made of is the motivation that drives us all. Without it, in fear of the experiences what life can hold is among the greatest contradictions; to live in fear of death while not being alive.


Edited by Twirling (06/15/03 01:10 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Twirling]
    #1634668 -

Do people have to start adding IMO's after every statement?

I don't think many spiritual ideas here are meant to be the poster's inflexible view of the world.
Can it be generally assumed that it is somewhat opinion-oriented, reducing the need for scientific proof because someone said "we are all one consciousness".

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Grav]
    #1634685 -

I think constant allowance for personal error, as indicated by 'I think' or 'In my opinion', forestalls the emotional trap we can fall into when our arguments are proven imperfect.

An emotional response to being 'wrong' could be irrational in that it is unconstructive and leads to withdrawal, either of one's own expression or that of the offending party.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: castaway]
    #1635124 -

Grav: Can it be generally assumed that it is somewhat opinion-oriented,

If this is a question, then my answer is 'No'.
If metaphysics is rooted merely in opinion, then all such discussions should be sent to either OTD or PAL.

Since I don't see metaphysics in such a light, it should stay here and it should be subject to scrutiny.

*goes back outside to trim the hedges*


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Sclorch]
    #1637339 -

Sclorch - God damn you, you're in the cave too y'know, we all are, unless...you have found Nirvana or some kind of enlightenment we don't know about. Just because you aspire academically in philosophy does not mean you see the flames producing the shadows for what they are.....but alas......I will never forgive you *sniff* *sniff*

.......;)

Pink Shark Mark - I was just saying that it is wrong to OVER- critisize someone for their thoughts. He was not presenting a theory to be analyzed. Positive encouragement is good, I agree with you on that if that was your intentions.

You know, when I refered to 'discourse', that was the key element of my critisizm of your posts. It creates an unbalanced power-relation between you and PsycheStudent while you are trying to convey your ideas to him. You think it helped...but most likely he was confused. 'Discourse', a specialized way of talking, whether it be philosphy, economics, science, politics etc. gives immediate power to the individual who excercises it. It alienates, rather than integrates. It is oppositional, not co-operational. That's why I said....'barrage with 'philo-major' discourse. Especially the people who post their ideas on particular theories, I mean, I find it interesting, but you can't get frustrated when someone has trouble understanding it, or is not following the modality of philosophical logic that it entails. You have to realize the fact that some of us do take philosophy academically, but some of us are just interested in the questions it asks.

Perhaps I came to the perception that you were OVER-critical by your method of examination. Singling out each sentence, each particular phrase you find illogical, or untruthful. This is truly saying more than the actual content of your post. It is rather adversarial. It is almost putting on display for all to see - for all to see the illogicality in SO AND SO's argument. It defeats the whole purpose of each sentence and each seperate yet correlating sentiments of each sentence, building together to make the message complete. Almost, reductionism in a sense. But what are you reducing? The thoughts...the will...of the person you are analyzing. Be-littlement.

Anyways, I'm just calling it how I see it.....and I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and believe that you're intentions were truly noble.

Peace,
i&I

Edited by 3MJ3 (06/16/03 12:33 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: 3MJ3]
    #1638208 -

3MJ3 writes:

Pink Shark Mark - I was just saying that it is wrong to OVER- critisize someone for their thoughts.

Please point out to me where I criticized him at all, let alone OVER-criticized him. I did nothing more than ask for clarification and point out logical fallacies.

He was not presenting a theory to be analyzed.

He presented no theory at all. As a matter of fact, he never even got around to stating what the "true purpose of humanity" is, which is why I decided to comment on the post in the first place.

Positive encouragement is good, I agree with you on that if that was your intentions.

And if I intended not to encourage him -- positively or otherwise -- but instead was simply trying to find out what he believes is the true purpose of humanity and how he came to believe it, you disagree with me?

You know, when I refered to 'discourse', that was the key element of my critisizm of your posts.

Good grief. HE was the one indulging in discourse -- I was merely asking questions.

From the Oxford Dictionary of Current English:

discourse -- 1 conversation; speech or lecture; lengthy treatment of subject.

Was he or was he not giving a lecture? Was his treatment of the subject more lengthy than mine?

It creates an unbalanced power-relation...

Please clarify.

...between you and PsycheStudent while you are trying to convey your ideas to him.

I wasn't trying to convey my ideas to him, I was trying to find out just what it was he was trying to convey to the readers.

You think it helped...but most likely he was confused.

That's just a tad patronizing, don't you think? If he has the intelligence to write a post such as that, clearly he has the intelligence to understand the questions I was asking.

'Discourse', a specialized way of talking, whether it be philosphy, economics, science, politics etc. gives immediate power to the individual who excercises it.

Then he has more power than me, doesn't he, since he was the one posting a discourse. As for giving "power", that is incorrect. What gives a statement power is its clarity and truth, not the style in which it is couched.

It alienates, rather than integrates. It is oppositional, not co-operational.

I have no interest in "integrating" or "co-operating", or even "alienating" or "opposing"; I just want to find out what he believes our true purpose might be and how he arrived at that belief.

You have to realize the fact that some of us do take philosophy academically, but some of us are just interested in the questions it asks.

As am I. I want to know what our true purpose is. I am still waiting.

Perhaps I came to the perception that you were OVER-critical by your method of examination. Singling out each sentence, each particular phrase you find illogical, or untruthful.

How better to identify the specific parts of his discourse I wish clarified? No possibility of confusion or misinterpretation that way, is there?

This is truly saying more than the actual content of your post. It is rather adversarial.

Ah. So now I am to be a specimen for your psychologizing. It can't be possible that I am just trying to find something out -- oh, no! I must have some ulterior motive due to some character flaw. Uh huh.

It is almost putting on display for all to see - for all to see the illogicality in SO AND SO's argument.

Are you saying it's better to have people try to guess for which parts of a lengthy post I am requesting clarification and which parts I find contradictory? I have found over decades of debate that the method of attaching my response directly to the sentence or phrase generating the response leaves the least possible room for misinterpretation.

It defeats the whole purpose of each sentence and each seperate yet correlating sentiments of each sentence, building together to make the message complete.

His original post remains here for all to read, contemplate, examine, grok, and appreciate in its unedited entirety. Nothing has been "defeated" or altered in any way. I fail to see the problem.

Almost, reductionism in a sense. But what are you reducing? The thoughts...the will...of the person you are analyzing. Be-littlement.

Dude, you are WAAAAYYYYY over-thinking this. I am not "reducing" or "belittling" or even "analyzing" the person -- or his thoughts or his will -- at all. I just want to know what our damn purpose is and at least a brief explanation of the process the writer undertook to discover this purpose. You impute imaginary motives to me with not the slightest shred of evidence.

Anyways, I'm just calling it how I see it.....

Is that to be considered an apology for implying my interest in his post was merely to shred it and somehow make myself look like a genius, or is it a standard generic cop-out meant to cover pretty much anything and everything to which I might take exception?

...and I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and believe that you're intentions were truly noble.

Gee, that's awfully gracious of you. Thank you ever so much.

pinky


--------------------

Edited by pinksharkmark (06/16/03 07:17 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Phred]
    #1638552 -

please god tell me you dont talk like that in real life pinksharkmark, lol.

Loosen up brother.


Sure intellectual chess is fun here and there, and we all like to play but this thread, as others have observed wasn't really about scientifically proving anything to anybody. It was mere speculation and ideals.

I appreciate your challenge to him, and its good to be challenged and to challenge, but I challenge the manner in which you challenged him.

On what basis did ya make the argument? What was the purpose? Did you actually think he would show you evidence that would support his beliefs and change your mind?

If anything, you were being a tad pushy and agressive in your approach. Maybe you could have thrown in a smiley or two, or a sarcastic remark.

You are human afterall....arent you? :wink:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: tekramrepus]
    #1638574 -

"this thread, as others have observed wasn't really about scientifically proving anything to anybody. It was mere speculation and ideals."-

Are you reading this PsycheStudent?
Your ideas have been reduced to speculation!

Defend yourself!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: castaway]
    #1639495 -

Pink Shark Mark....Firstly, you just did it again! You used that dissecting approach that you are so akin to. I don't dislike it...but I'm just saying that it is rather self-defeating. Why?, you say. Because most people take offense to such over-analyzing of each sentence and phrase of their posts. The fact that this forum is conversational makes your methods a tad excessive. Why?...oh brother!

As for the function of discourse, you should read Discipline & Punish by Michel Foucault. You can't understand it's function by looking it up in the dictionary. Foucault sees discourse as a consequent of rational institutions (schools, church, politics, economics etc.) creating a specialized rhetoric which corresponds to a collection of knowledge. For instance, the lawyer and the judges all have some form of legal discourse, which gives immediate advantage to their understanding, and at the same time greatly disadvantages the condemned, because of his lack of knowledge of legal proceedings. Hence the unbalanced economy of power between those involved (condemned, lawyers, judge). Such is the case with your analysis. It is a discourse, a methodology used in philosophy by philosophy students. So really, your discourse was overpowering him because it related back to a collection of knowledge with which he had no knowledge of. He probably doesn't even know the logicality of philosophical debate. You do. Hence, you hold the power of discourse. He had no discourse, for discourse is not based on speculation, but as I said before, rational institutionalism. It's obvious who came out with the power in that transference of words.....how many posts did he make? Did he even respond?

This is a problem that is propogated by the fact that this forum is both spiritually and philosophy related. I am thinking that PsycheStudents speculation is more spiritually oriented, rather than philosophical and this can make a big difference in how one builds a conversation with the other. I say that there be a purely philosophical thread, for scrutinization, and a purely spiritual thread. Here's a question that relates...why do you think philosopher's like Nietzsche could never disprove religion (spiritual)? Because religion is NOT logical. Spirituality is NOT logical. Faith is NOT logical.

Anyways.....go take a look at Foucault's book. I think you might like it.

P.S: I would take it as a compliment if you did not dissect this post. I hate having to write a long post just to answer all your questions, which I'm sure I haven't :wink:

Peace,
i&I

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: 3MJ3]
    #1640126 -

3MJ3 writes:

...most people take offense to such over-analyzing of each sentence and phrase of their posts. The fact that this forum is conversational makes your methods a tad excessive.

I ask again ... what over analysis? Let's review my post, shall we? I let the vast majority of his statements slide by with no comment at all. This is hardly "over-analyzing". As a matter of fract, I did no analyzing at all. I asked eleven questions, the most important of which I asked twice -- just what exactly does he believe our purpose to be?

I pointed out a logical fallacy -- that existence in and of itself "proves" or even implies purpose.

I nudged him a bit hoping he would expound on the cryptic statement that we are "consciousness evolved".

I pointed out a second logical fallacy -- that the fact we are different than other life forms "proves" or even implies purpose.

I challenged his arbitrary assertion that if we ever make it to another planet we will wipe it out.

That's all I did. And it was done in just over a hundred and fifty words. This is "analysis"? This is "discourse"?

At what point did this forum become restricted to "conversational", by the way? I have very carefully read and re-read all the various sticky posts here from the time I have started reading here some years ago. I must have missed that part somehow.

As for the function of discourse, you should read Discipline & Punish by Michel Foucault. You can't understand it's function by looking it up in the dictionary. Foucault sees discourse as .....

Um, yeah, I can understand the function of discourse without reading what Foucault opines about the specialized jargon so beloved of various institutions. Besides, I repeat that what I was doing was not even close to "discourse". I asked for clarification and pointed out two logical fallacies. Period. I was not lecturing, intimidating, browbeating, using specialized jargon, exhibiting esoteric or specialized knowledge, using multi-syllabic words or expounding on the philosophical principles of the Greek Rationalists. I was asking simple (in many cases single-word) questions.

As an aside, note that a defendent is not at a disadvantage because the judges and lawyers use "discourse", he is at a disadvantage because of (as you point out) his lack of knowledge. The same is true of your average car owner trying to decipher a conversation between two mechanics, a medical patient trying to grasp the concept of histamine tolerance, or my mother trying to unravel the complexities of Unix.

So really, your discourse was overpowering him because it related back to a collection of knowledge with which he had no knowledge of. He probably doesn't even know the logicality of philosophical debate. You do. Hence, you hold the power of discourse.

What knowledge did I display that he lacked? (and why do you persist in presuming he knows nothing about logic, by the way?) All I did was ask him questions about the knowledge he was trying (unsuccessfully) to impart to us, fa cryin' out loud! I have no power whatsoever -- he is the one who holds all the power, since he chooses to withhold from us what our true purpose is and how he discovered it.

Here's a question that relates...why do you think philosopher's like Nietzsche could never disprove religion (spiritual)? Because religion is NOT logical. Spirituality is NOT logical. Faith is NOT logical.

Why? Because one cannot (and need not) logically disprove an arbitrary assertion. If I claim there are intelligent beings who bear a startling resemblance to camshafts inhabiting the moons of Jupiter and influencing the course of human invents through mental manipulation of a sort indetectible to our current instrumentation, you need not disprove my assertion, you need only ignore it.

However, we are straying far afield from the topic of this thread. I must note that we still remain ignorant of the true purpose of humanity.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Phred]
    #1642114 -

The universe and it's realms of existence are so vast that they cannot be imagined. Picture this physical 3D+Time universe as large as you can, and you've not matched the significance of a single grain of sand on the largest beach. Just as we look out into the macroscopic, so far deep we can look to the microscopic.

How can we think of ourselves as so important?

Etymologically, the word "faith" is not meant to imply thoughtless trust in an unprovable concept. Rather, it means to suggest a pursuant conviction to the truth. "I want to know the truth." "I am seeking the truth." A faithful person, therefore, questions himself and what he is told on a constant basis. A faithful person is open to the suggestion that all things he knows are obsolete.


--------------------


:poison: Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud :poison:
Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: Ped]
    #1644850 -

In my egoless state of euphoric stupor induced by the humble mushroom, I see that ultimately, these words and their essence are all beautiful. Why. Because they hold the true 'being' of life. Our purpose in life is not to be argued over logically...only to be realized that it is right here in front of us.....our purpose is to be understood, and to understand. I can't think it could be much more than that....


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The true purpose of humanity [Re: 3MJ3]
    #1644855 -

Beautifully said.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Shop: Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Injection Grain Bag

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Not everything can be explained by logic
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Mixomatosis 4,919 63 12/27/03 06:07 PM
by Positronius
* Human Cultivation 4.3.2 -- Why I should be shot HarveyWalbanger 894 8 10/08/02 06:53 PM
by Sclorch
* Do Basic Human Morals Exist
( 1 2 all )		 mrfreedom 5,478 24 05/28/02 07:55 AM
by Sclorch
* Human Logic, Linguistics and The Mushroom ParabolaChair 3,299 6 04/29/04 05:59 AM
by fireworks_god
* S. M. on Foucault Cory Duchesne 595 16 12/16/18 10:45 AM
by laughingdog
* The Seven Steps of Human Evolution
( 1 2 3 all )		 ShroomismM 6,621 42 05/23/09 11:39 AM
by OrgoneConclusion
* The Seven Steps of Human Evolution
( 1 2 all )		 Anonymous 5,304 20 01/22/03 08:54 AM
by Shroomism
* Matrix Reloaded True Meaning/ Transcript of Neo/Architect
( 1 2 3 all )		 HagbardCeline 7,742 45 04/17/12 12:47 AM
by Buster_Brown

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
4,880 topic views. 0 members, 255 guests and 20 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.036 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 14 queries.