Your last question is a good one. Why can't we enjoy what we experience, rather than feeling sorry for ourselves for what we don't?
On Monday, December 15, 2014 3:16:24 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote: > > I have a DSc. though swear I never listened in class. We need a shield of > innocence to get through "education". The false teachers always deny > logic. Superstition creeps in - even your soul/s is a classic form Allan. > Standard supernatural views split between god-centred and soul-centred > views, naturalism splits into objective - subjective and, of course, > according to nihilism (or pessimism), what would make a life meaningful > either cannot obtain or as a matter of fact simply never does. > > Here's some classic jive: > 'Another fresh argument for nihilism is forthcoming from certain defenses > of anti-natalism, the view that it is immoral to bring new people into > existence because doing so would be a harm to them. There are now a variety > of rationales for anti-natalism, but most relevant to debates about whether > life is meaningful is probably the following argument from David Benatar > (2006, 18–59). According to him, the bads of existing (e.g., pains) are > real disadvantages relative to not existing, while the goods of existing > (pleasures) are not real advantages relative to not existing, since there > is in the latter state no one to be deprived of them. If indeed the state > of not existing is no worse than that of experiencing the benefits of > existence, then, since existing invariably brings harm in its wake, > existing is always a net harm compared to not existing. Although this > argument is about goods such as pleasures in the first instance, it seems > generalizable to non-experiential goods, including that of meaning in life.' > Benatar, D., 2006, Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into > Existence, New York: Oxford University Press. > > "Fresh argument"? Gnosticism is rather ancient! > > One straightforward rationale for nihilism is the combination of > supernaturalism about what makes life meaningful and atheism about whether > God exists. If you believe that God or a soul is necessary for meaning in > life, and if you believe that neither exists, then you are a nihilist, > someone who denies that life has meaning. Albert Camus is famous for > expressing this kind of perspective, suggesting that the lack of an > afterlife and of a rational, divinely ordered universe undercuts the > possibility of meaning (Camus 1955; cf. Ecclesiastes). > Camus, A., 1955, The Myth of Sisyphus, J. O'Brian (tr.), London: H. > Hamilton. > > The "philosophy" (where did we get the idea philosophers do philosophy?) > has a lot in common with Monty Python - hardly surprising given these > clowns went to Oxbridge. We might see philosophers as just another set of > BS merchants selling 'argument'. Let's have your souls and not believe in > them mate - then we get get as really miserable as this state: > > The idea shared among many contemporary nihilists is that there is > something inherent to the human condition that prevents meaning from > arising, even granting that God exists. For instance, some nihilists make > the Schopenhauerian claim that our lives lack meaning because we are > invariably dissatisfied; either we have not yet obtained what we seek, or > we have obtained it and are bored > > I can't read stuff like this without imaging how far we can slide with it > - like we did as kids slicking up an ice patch of the footpath. Have we > forgotten how to have a laugh when we get into the slide? > > On Monday, 15 December 2014 11:28:48 UTC, Allan Heretic wrote: >> >> LoL >> BS : Bull Shitter >> MS : Master Shitter >> PHD : Piled Higher & Deeper >> >> The true meaning of universal degree systems. >> >> Not oddly I do agree with you. It seems our society is built literally on >> bullshit. Unfortunately our society chooses to feed upon the soft lie of >> bullshit rather thsn face the simple truth. There always be a few >> enlightened individuals. There has always been teachers of truth and those >> false teachers (possible examples: politicians ~ religious leaders ~ greedy >> souls) that feed on gullible innocent souls who in their need to survive >> create their own fertilizer. >> >> Do not murder, rape, enslave or harm others >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: archytas <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 11:56 AM >> Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Taurascatics >> >> The professor wrote a BS book on BS. No secrets revealed, only the >> promise they were to be, which is BS. >> >> On Monday, December 15, 2014 6:24:42 AM UTC, Allan Heretic wrote: >>> >>> Silence lad >>> STOP! Giving away secrets >>> BS, MS, & PHD >>> >>> Do not murder, rape, enslave or harm others >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: archytas <[email protected]> >>> To: [email protected] >>> Sent: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 7:16 AM >>> Subject: Mind's Eye Taurascatics >>> >>> “The study of bullshit should occupy an important place alongside >>> rhetoric because taurascatics is the antistrophe of rhetorical theory, for >>> both are concerned with the politics of semiotic interaction, and with the >>> frameworks within which that interaction will be produced, interpreted, and >>> judged.” (Professor Fredal, Ohio State) >>> The frame includes: : >>> • The Bullshitter (the originator of the BS) >>> • The Bullshit, (the content), and >>> • The Bullshitee (the recipient). >>> Examples of the kind of BS one might encounter on a daily basis : e.g. >>> • “Collateral damage” for civilians accidentally killed in military >>> actions. >>> • “Rightsizing” for firing people, and >>> • “Alternative interrogation techniques” for torture. >>> >>> One of the most salient features of our culture is that there is so much >>> bullshit. Everyone knows this. Each of us contributes his share. But we >>> tend to take the situation for granted. Most people are rather confident of >>> their ability to recognize bullshit and to avoid being taken in by it. So >>> the phenomenon has not aroused much deliberate concern, or attracted much >>> sustained inquiry. In consequence, we have no clear understanding of what >>> bullshit is, why there is so much of it, or what functions it serves. >>> (Harry Frankfurt) >>> >>> My opinion is one has to undertake the labours of Hercules to clear >>> space to say anything. If Facilitator calls his next sculpture 'The >>> Taurascat' and it looks like me I won't sue if I can use a photograph on >>> the cover of my next book. It will be indistinguishable from other >>> marketing and he could always say I put him up to it. There might be some >>> publicity from one called 'Facilitatory Taurascatics' or one in silver >>> from Allan. >>> >>> Seasons greetings everyone. Remember, the grass is greener on the other >>> side because of cow pats. >>> >>> -- >>> >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> -- >> >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> ""Minds Eye"" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
