EPTJust way too depresed. - Page 5
| Blogs > Monst3r |
|
bITt.mAN
Switzerland3693 Posts
| ||
|
bITt.mAN
Switzerland3693 Posts
On June 06 2010 06:38 SpiritoftheTunA wrote: its very normal for 15 year olds to think like this actually Truth posting it on a forum however, is only going to rile up the devout christians and devout atheists Truth  no matter what you choose to believe, try not to give up on reason and logic, they exist for a reason. Truth, but what if I say: "YOU exist for a reason"? Oh no, then I'm not impartial/liberal, so I'm dismissed. there's literally no way to tell what will happen after death for sure, so just make life as awesome as you can, however you choose to define awesome (hopefully its not a) being depressed b) harming others c) harming yourself d) any linear combination of the above) Why? Whats the point of doing 'good things' for the sake of 'doing good things'? It's nice to have blogs like these because they lead to people asking hard questions. But the answers to these question are what WILL define how you live your life, iMO pretty important... Then again, as we live in what we like to believe is a Neo-Darwinian era [no not the name of some retro map] of course we must worship reason and logic. Not disrespectin' but they do have some flaws (take IB Theory of Knowledge and you'll see). I'm just sad I have to go now so I can't sit on this thread | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On June 06 2010 06:38 SpiritoftheTunA wrote: its very normal for 15 year olds to think like this actually posting it on a forum however, is only going to rile up the devout christians and devout atheists tl is not a typical place. clearly it does more than this. | ||
|
SpiritoftheTunA
United States20903 Posts
On June 06 2010 07:03 bITt.mAN wrote: Truth, but what if I say: "YOU exist for a reason"? Oh no, then I'm not impartial/liberal, so I'm dismissed. saying that "you exist for a reason" and implying that the reason is metaphysical isnt the same as saying that reason and logic exist for a reason, because reason and logic are human constructs designed to analyze things (that's the reason, they exist so people can think about things in an orderly way). don't play with semantics to make a point. about the theory of knowledge thing: i mean the basic big division is that reason/logic/science can explain the physical (and only the physical) while the metaphysical is reserved for faith and/or constructs like existentialism/nihilism/etc. i havent taken theory of knowledge, though i might take a philosophy class at some point, but i think i know the basic gist of things. | ||
|
Zurles
United Kingdom1659 Posts
On June 05 2010 11:13 Monst3r wrote: I feel very depressed atm because of just thinking about life... I think of what happens when things die.. Do they go to a magical heaven or just rot in the ground. If their is no god, how was there a big bang, but at the same time I think how is there even a god, shouldn't god have been created by someone? I don't really think its normal for 15 year old's to think like this, but I just can't get these thoughts out of my mind. I hate when I can't get a question answered, and honestly, if I didn't have a family I would actually want to die just to see if there really is a heaven or if I shall rot in the ground. Firstly it's completely normal for 15 year olds and younger to think like that. Secondly you're going to die eventually anyway so don't worry about that, and thirdly I'm sad to disappoint you, but you're probably just gonna rot in the ground, but the thing is, you're dead, so it makes no damn difference. | ||
|
PH
United States6173 Posts
On June 06 2010 07:10 SpiritoftheTunA wrote: saying that "you exist for a reason" and implying that the reason is metaphysical isnt the same as saying that reason and logic exist for a reason, because reason and logic are human constructs designed to analyze things (that's the reason, they exist so people can think about things in an orderly way). don't play with semantics to make a point. about the theory of knowledge thing: i mean the basic big division is that reason/logic/science can explain the physical (and only the physical) while the metaphysical is reserved for faith and/or constructs like existentialism/nihilism/etc. i havent taken theory of knowledge, though i might take a philosophy class at some point, but i think i know the basic gist of things. I'm a major in philosophy, and you're confusing me with the way you're using words... Reason is a faculty usually attributed to intelligent beings, most often human beings (whatever it means to be one). It doesn't have anything immediately to do with logic...just beings that can reason usually can utilize logic... Logic is a kind of fundamental system of functioning. It came originally out of basic arithmetic and shit like that and was applied to argumentation and thought later on. It's not clear whether it's an underlying part of reality or if it's merely a human construct. No philosopher to date has been able to come up with a satisfactory theory as to whether it exists independently of human thought or something like that...that's worded like crap, but you should kinda get my meaning. I think there's been some discourse on that lately with some "Neo-Fregean" movement, but I don't really know much about it. Theory of knowledge is really just a sub-field of philosophy that focuses on knowledge, how we have it, how we know if we have it or not, etc. I think the field is pretty mature and dead right now, though (that is, until someone comes around and destroys the current reigning theory with something clever). What you're thinking of is more related to philosophy of mind/body that tries to figure out what the division between the mind and body is, if there is one. This has a lot of implications for the existence of something beyond the physical, or something just nonphysical period. There really is no division between "reason/logic/science" and other independent theories like "existentialism/nihilism/etc". The latter ignore big universal metaphysical questions entirely and foucs on the nature of reality closer to home (philosophy = study of the nature of reality, after all). Basically, if you were to ask them what they thought about their theory as existing or constructs or w/e, they simply wouldn't care. It doesn't matter. Heideggarian existentialism, for example, works with "worlds", or sort of systems of influence we inhabit. We inhabit the world of being starcraft fans, I inhabit the world of being a college student, etc. That's all that matters for Heidegger, and he doesn't give two shits about far off planets and stars that have no influence on the worlds we inhabit. If the philosophy doesn't concern itself with logic and stuff, then it has no place in it. On June 06 2010 07:03 bITt.mAN wrote: Why? Whats the point of doing 'good things' for the sake of 'doing good things'? It's nice to have blogs like these because they lead to people asking hard questions. But the answers to these question are what WILL define how you live your life, iMO pretty important... Then again, as we live in what we like to believe is a Neo-Darwinian era [no not the name of some retro map] of course we must worship reason and logic. Not disrespectin' but they do have some flaws (take IB Theory of Knowledge and you'll see). I'm just sad I have to go now so I can't sit on this thread There's a million different reasons why you should do things for the sake of doing things. There's also a million different reasons why you shouldn't. Don't play devil's advocate for a stupid question like this. The rise of logic has nothing to do with Darwinism. It has everything to do with the development of a formal logical system. Logic's been around as long as philosophy has. Aristotle had developed a huge and very detailed system of logic that had lasting influence until like a few hundred years ago. Logic actually had a very loose and fluid meaning, and in effect, every major philosopher between Plato and the 19-20th century developed their own "logic" in developing their theories. The rise of a formal logical system is a huge step for philosophy and argumentation in general. It's not a "Darwinian" thing...wtf lol. And no, your IB Theory of Knowledge means nothing to me. | ||
|
SpiritoftheTunA
United States20903 Posts
On June 06 2010 07:56 PH wrote: + Show Spoiler + I'm a major in philosophy, and you're confusing me with the way you're using words... Reason is a faculty usually attributed to intelligent beings, most often human beings (whatever it means to be one). It doesn't have anything immediately to do with logic...just beings that can reason usually can utilize logic... Logic is a kind of fundamental system of functioning. It came originally out of basic arithmetic and shit like that and was applied to argumentation and thought later on. It's not clear whether it's an underlying part of reality or if it's merely a human construct. No philosopher to date has been able to come up with a satisfactory theory as to whether it exists independently of human thought or something like that...that's worded like crap, but you should kinda get my meaning. I think there's been some discourse on that lately with some "Neo-Fregean" movement, but I don't really know much about it. Theory of knowledge is really just a sub-field of philosophy that focuses on knowledge, how we have it, how we know if we have it or not, etc. I think the field is pretty mature and dead right now, though (that is, until someone comes around and destroys the current reigning theory with something clever). What you're thinking of is more related to philosophy of mind/body that tries to figure out what the division between the mind and body is, if there is one. This has a lot of implications for the existence of something beyond the physical, or something just nonphysical period. There really is no division between "reason/logic/science" and other independent theories like "existentialism/nihilism/etc". The latter ignore big universal metaphysical questions entirely and foucs on the nature of reality closer to home (philosophy = study of the nature of reality, after all). Basically, if you were to ask them what they thought about their theory as existing or constructs or w/e, they simply wouldn't care. It doesn't matter. Heideggarian existentialism, for example, works with "worlds", or sort of systems of influence we inhabit. We inhabit the world of being starcraft fans, I inhabit the world of being a college student, etc. That's all that matters for Heidegger, and he doesn't give two shits about far off planets and stars that have no influence on the worlds we inhabit. If the philosophy doesn't concern itself with logic and stuff, then it has no place in it. Thanks for clearing up all those issues~ (or at least trying to do so with someone with no knowledge of philosophical jargon or theory) I'll keep your name in mind whenever I need a philosophical question answered :3. I should clarify what I was trying to say: where "logic, reason, and science" went, it's only really "science" by definition - I'll copypaste wikipedia here because I don't have a clever definition. "Science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is a systematic enterprise of gathering knowledge about the world and organizing and condensing that knowledge into testable laws and theories." So basically, evaluating and modeling the physical. I stupidly called the second group "existentialism, nihilism, etc" because I view those two general idea-blobs (moreso nihilism) as reactions to attempts to ascribe "meaning" or "value" to some things over others due to faith - so ultimately, extensions of beliefs based on faith. Of course it's selling philosophy several thousand parsecs short, and I shouldn't have done that. | ||
|
gilga
United States24 Posts
On June 05 2010 11:13 Monst3r wrote: I feel very depressed atm because of just thinking about life... I think of what happens when things die.. Do they go to a magical heaven or just rot in the ground. If their is no god, how was there a big bang, but at the same time I think how is there even a god, shouldn't god have been created by someone? I don't really think its normal for 15 year old's to think like this, but I just can't get these thoughts out of my mind. I hate when I can't get a question answered, and honestly, if I didn't have a family I would actually want to die just to see if there really is a heaven or if I shall rot in the ground. l o l User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Bub
United States3518 Posts
| ||
|
Piste
6179 Posts
On June 06 2010 06:25 bITt.mAN wrote: This outlook on life SUCKS. With this mindset, there's no point in doing anything, 'cuz we're al gonna die anyeays' . Ask yourself: do you really feel that this could be true, do you feel that there's no reason for it all, that when we die nothing happens, just nothing. Can you come to terms with that idea, or are you uncomfortable with it. If you feel that there might be something wrong with the mindset laid out above, then believe that, believe that the useless train of thoughts, going nowhere, saying that 'there is nothing at the end of it all' is a bunch of bullshit. THIS IS NOT OUTLOOK ON LIFE, ITS ABOUT AFTER LIFE. And no it does not suck. Ofcourse there is meaning for your life. it's to be happy and succeed. We are here to live. You might be here wasting your time and waiting for death but that's not the case with all of us. I'm happy and I don't need to imagine that there is life after death. There is absolutely nothing. No thoughts, no happiness, no sadness. nothing. you don't see black void becouse you dont see anything. you dont hear. you dont have senses. On June 05 2010 23:07 Reason wrote: Maybe utter emptiness could be viewed as sort of peaceful rather than terrifying? Personal I'd prefer some tripped out ascension to a higher plane. Your not there to view it from either side so... =) | ||
|
fight_or_flight
United States3988 Posts
On June 05 2010 20:59 Reason wrote: These are the same questions every single human has been tangling with for generations. This is why you will never find an answer for these questions. Make up your own answers, or forget about it. Welcome to the club. Even worse, most people have it all figured out by the time they're 15, and if you are unable to do the same your life will be pretty difficult. To the OP: Our minds like to break things down into extremes in almost all cases. In reality, there is generally a continuum. | ||
|
PH
United States6173 Posts
On June 06 2010 08:17 SpiritoftheTunA wrote: Thanks for clearing up all those issues~ (or at least trying to do so with someone with no knowledge of philosophical jargon or theory) I'll keep your name in mind whenever I need a philosophical question answered :3. I should clarify what I was trying to say: where "logic, reason, and science" went, it's only really "science" by definition - I'll copypaste wikipedia here because I don't have a clever definition. "Science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is a systematic enterprise of gathering knowledge about the world and organizing and condensing that knowledge into testable laws and theories." So basically, evaluating and modeling the physical. I stupidly called the second group "existentialism, nihilism, etc" because I view those two general idea-blobs (moreso nihilism) as reactions to attempts to ascribe "meaning" or "value" to some things over others due to faith - so ultimately, extensions of beliefs based on faith. Of course it's selling philosophy several thousand parsecs short, and I shouldn't have done that. Ah, I can sort of see what you're trying to say. I think I'd have to ask you to expand on that a lot more before I'd be able to fairly comment on any of it. Science is a very limited thing in that it's entirely empirical - you can't do anything beyond what you can see, do, and both see and do repeatedly. It's great because anything you do know, you'll know for pretty damn certain, but you can't move any faster than the rate at which things come at you, so to speak. It's very important to keep in mind that limitation to science. It's not an end-all/be-all except in a fanciful and hypothetical sense, when it's complete. I doubt that will ever happen, and if it ever does, it definitely won't be in any sense we can even begin to imagine. I don't know if any of that was relevant at all to what you said, lol, but it's some stuff that came to mind when I read what you wrote. | ||
|
FraCuS
United States1072 Posts
That should be everyones goal. | ||
|
RHCPgergo
Hungary345 Posts
On June 07 2010 07:30 FraCuS wrote: Live life to the fullest. That should be everyones goal. Shield battery anyone? ... I was thinking of making a similar post in my blog, but I'm not sure if I could get my points across, so I'll postpone it a little. About death... yeah. You can't know whats after it. Uncertainty may be one of the worst things sometimes. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On June 06 2010 16:30 fight_or_flight wrote: Even worse, most people have it all figured out by the time they're 15, and if you are unable to do the same your life will be pretty difficult. it is indeed difficult to strive to be honest with one's self. | ||
|
rushz0rz
Canada5300 Posts
| ||
|
Kingfisher
Canada144 Posts
But don't worry, you'll just keep bugging yourself with the question until it reaches its peak and you'll start not giving a shit. | ||
|
Kingfisher
Canada144 Posts
And no, your IB Theory of Knowledge means nothing to me. IB ToK itself doesn't mean or teach you anything. I know because I took the course. | ||
|
Pengu1n
United States552 Posts
| ||
| ||
