Justification

[The Feral Underclass]

Through a time line of history human beings have slotted in and out of existance. So much has happened before us and will continue to happen after us. But what is after us? For seventy years, some less, some more we play out what seems to be a pointless act of breathing, eating and procreating. We live! With no explination. We do not choose to exist we simply are. Created from nature with no precise purpose.

Everything that happens in the universe is a set of rules. Everything is defined. Trees give us oxygen, water hydrates the trees. The rain is a cycle of evaperation. Everything fits. Everything is defined by a reation and a consequence. Everything except existence.

If we look at the world we wonder at the atrocities commited against each other. We see exploitation and for the most we feel it. We use and abuse the planet around us. We rape, torture and murder each other. War and greed are accepted as the status quo. But can it be blamed on one another? Can it be blamed on human nature? What is human nature? How could things have been played out any differently? How are we suppose to live?

Being created does not give us the prerequisite of knowing how to exist. We desperatly battle against the unknowing trying to exist the best way we know how.. What is knowing how? We have nothing to compare it with We have nothing to say this is wrong or this is right except our own subjective opinions. It is the first time we have existed, from millennia ago. How else was history supposed to progress if the human mind knows only what was created by other human minds. Minds, which like our own, understand nothing about existence except the fact that it exists.

When you walk into a maths exam you are not expected, nor is it possible to automatically understand what maths is. You have to prepare and study. You have to learn and apply logic to be able to fulfill the role of taking a maths exam. For existence however, there are no books. No teachers with an unambiguous perspective of what life is. So we create understanding. We create our own knowledge and call it fact in order to comprehend and rationalize the point of being. And then we die.

For seven decades we struggle against something we can not know and survive the best way we can. We survive like those before us because we know nothing else. Until death. Until everything we have fought for, fought against, created and destroyed, until being and cosnciousness cease to mean anything. All that exists now is nothingness. We become nothing. We cease to exist and are forgotten as history advances further into time and billions more humans slot in and out of existence in a cycle of being and nothingness.

So can we ever know existence. Many people believe they do. Religion has invented understanding. With two thirds of the worlds population accepting it as reality. In some cases using excess force to assert that understanding. Again we can not be suprised. What I have descirbed is depressing. Fatalistic even. It reduces everything to a point of meaninglessness and people are conscious of it ,so believe in gods in order to reconcile life in what otherwise would seem a period of pointless bewilderment. But does this not therefore negate the existance of god? If we reduce everything down to those things we all understand and that are proven beyond any doubt, the fact of living and the fact of dying, can it not be realised what indeed religion is? A conceptualization. A desperate attempt at understanding the meaning of things we admit we know nothing about.

So if religion does not give us the answers, how can we understand all of this? For me, what I think, is instead of asking what the meaning of all life and all death is, ask what is my meaning? How am I as an indevidual defined within my existance? Instead of attempting to answer questions that can not be answered one must seek to justify ones own life.

[New Tolerance]

After reading all that I still don't know what you are trying to get at. Could you sum up what you are trying to say in one simple sentence?

[The Feral Underclass]

What do you think it means?

[New Tolerance]

Well, are you looking for comments? Because if this is your opinion then there's not much point in replying. (Since I don't think I you are eager to change your mind)

[(*]

For me, what I think, is instead of asking what the meaning of all life and all death is, ask what is my meaning? How am I as an indevidual defined within my existance?

Very thought-provoking


We all have different purposes, and perform different functions
Some people are better than others at certain things.
My meaning? I've yet to see...yet to start living my life. After I graduate from university (5 months), and get my life started....I'll have an answer, I hope.

[The Feral Underclass]

New Tolerance I am asking you a question...what do you think it means?

[Monty Cantsin]

New Tolerance, The Anarchist Tension is talking about what Justification do we have FOR OUR EXISTANSE, WHAT Justification DO WE HAVE FOR THE WAY WE LIVE, WHAT SHOULD OUR GOALS BE WHAT ARE WE HEADING FOR? IS TEHRE A PERPOSE FOR OUR LIVES AND SO ON. ALL THOSE KIND OF QUESTIONS.

[Monty Cantsin]

sorry about the caps locks it wasnt meant.

[New Tolerance]

Well, now that things are cleared up....

Ok, to solve this problem first we should ask the question:

"Why do I even care about any of this?"

So why DO you care about any of this?

(By the way, "I'm curious" or "It's important" etc etc, aren't answers, tell me why do you think that it is "important")

[Monty Cantsin]

The reason why we care New Tolerance is so we can gain the ultimate truth and in doing so discovering the true direction and path to take instead of wasting our time moving down the wrong road.

[The Feral Underclass]

New Tolerance

What euripidies says is almost what I am saying. What I am trying to demonstrate is that we exist but for no purpose. We do not choose to exist we simply do and then we play this game of suvivel without ever achieving any meaning to this existence and then we die, where we stop knowing anything. Pretty pointless if you ask me. I also say that greed and war etc are results of our natural instinct to survive and that history could not have been any differently because we as humans have nothing to compare it with and so we are lost, as if you would be in a maths exam and didnt know what maths was.

We exist as indeviduals and the meaning of life is subjective to us as indeviduals and is defined by your desires. Therefore we must always justify our own existence, ie do the things we desire and so fulfilling the purpose of our life. ie I want to be a film director, if I could make films I would have justified my reason for existence and so fulfilling the meaning of life. Which is in a wider perspective simply those things which people desire to do.

Why is it important? In a wider sense it is important because the ability to justify yourself is the ultimate freedom. A freedom which everyone should be able to fulfill. If you can not fulfill it you are not achieving your purpose in life. That's a big thing. It's a bad thing.

Personally it is important because I am an anarchist, and I justify myself as an anarchist because of wanting to live in a world were these things are important to everyone. So that we live in a society where people simply live out their desires and justify themselves, instead of being subjugated to a wage all of their life to gain absic human rights and then die.

[New Tolerance]

The reason why we care New Tolerance is so we can gain the ultimate truth and in doing so discovering the true direction and path to take instead of wasting our time moving down the wrong road.


Ok, (holy, I'm too lazy to post a reply, it's been days). Step two:

Am I correct to say that you are telling me that you do this because you wish to do the right thing?

If so, answer the following:

Do you believe that you have done some right things so far in your life? (And did you feel good about it?)

[toastedmonkey]

I have been done this path of thought before, and i have seen others do the same.

To hold the view that life is meaningless can be seen as pessamistc, so people seem to ignore the topic.
I agree, i think that human existance is pointless, there is no point of us being here. However we are, and our minds are destroying the natural habitats and the systems that are forever running.
The human race have a problem, a big problem, they think they are important, or overly so.
But every specie is the same they all have equal importance, but it is the human race that tries to prove otherwise, and try to change everything around them to suit there needs, that is a danager to the world.
So i belive that although i have no meaning or purpose, i should at least try and correct/help the natural systems of the earth, by helping the doomed Human Race to instead of exploiting the enviroments around us, to adapt to live amongst the systems and return things to natural play.

We changed things that people dont realise. The likes of the Lake District in Cumbria, isnt a natural enviroment, it is a preseved area of now "man made bueaty". The lake district should be an area of dense oak woodland, instead it is grassy hills and resivoirs, not natural at all.
Human ind must stop doing this in every sense, and just exist.

[Monty Cantsin]

Originally posted by New [email protected] 22 2003, 11:26 PM


Am I correct to say that you are telling me that you do this because you wish to do the right thing?

If so, answer the following:

Do you believe that you have done some right things so far in your life? (And did you feel good about it?)
Well I think to do the right thing would be the ideal achievement, but I don’t think we will ever now for sure moreover i feel that the closes thing to the right thing is something for the good of humanity. Example Gandhi did the right thing Hitler did the wrong thing. But then even then some people would say that Hitler was doing the right thing by getting rid of the Jews. so overall I feel that right and wrong are really intangible it depends of the person and there morals which changes from person to person. Therefore the Justification for all those questions are a personal thing that each person has to deal with.

[New Tolerance]

Originally posted by euripidies+Dec 23 2003, 12:29 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (euripidies @ Dec 23 2003, 12:29 AM)
New [email protected] 22 2003, 11:26 PM


Am I correct to say that you are telling me that you do this because you wish to do the right thing?

If so, answer the following:

Do you believe that you have done some right things so far in your life? (And did you feel good about it?)
Well I think to do the right thing would be the ideal achievement, but I don’t think we will ever now for sure moreover i feel that the closes thing to the right thing is something for the good of humanity. Example Gandhi did the right thing Hitler did the wrong thing. But then even then some people would say that Hitler was doing the right thing by getting rid of the Jews. so overall I feel that right and wrong are really intangible it depends of the person and there morals which changes from person to person. Therefore the Justification for all those questions are a personal thing that each person has to deal with. [/b]
:(

O no, why is it that everytime I say something people always seem to misinterpret.

[Monty Cantsin]

what you said was "Am I correct to say that you are telling me that you do this because you wish to do the right thing?"

then you said that i "seem to misinterpret." what you said but this is what i meant.

ill simplfiy what i meant--

to do the right thing is best

to truly no right is impostible because it changes from person to person

i feel the closes thing to right is to help your fellow man

[New Tolerance]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2003, 12:53 AM
what you said was "Am I correct to say that you are telling me that you do this because you wish to do the right thing?"

then you said that i "seem to misinterpret." what you said but this is what i meant.

ill simplfiy what i meant--

to do the right thing is best

to truly no right is impostible because it changes from person to person

i feel the closes thing to right is to help your fellow man
Well, this is exactly the problem, I am NOT trying to emphasize this sentence:

"Am I correct to say that you are telling me that you do this because you wish to do the right thing?"

I AM trying to emphasize this sentence:

"Do you believe that you have done some right things so far in your life? (And did you feel good about it?) "

(I&#39;m actually trying to get you to tell me what you personally think about your own actions, unless you prefer not to talk about it)

[Monty Cantsin]

but i didnt "misinterpret" because i anwsered the frist question which if you read my anwser, will tell you what i think of the second.

[Monty Cantsin]

"Do you believe that you have done some right things so far in your life? (And did you feel good about it?) "

Now i answered this by saying that you can&#39;t no right i explained it more in the first post so read that if you won’t to know what i mean. But i also stated that i feel the closes thing to right would be to help you fellow man. now to this question have i done some right things yes but not on the scale that is needed, i guess that helping my friends would be helping my fellow man I’ve given food to homeless people, so on that scale i have helped but nothing to large. did i feel good about it kind of but there’s still much bigger things to be done then that.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

We exist because we know nothing else.

We keep living because we fear death.

Pessimism is just a way of avoiding systems.

[The Feral Underclass]

The point I think has been lost here. My point was not how you define the importance and success of your life. Being Gandhi does not make your life meaningful. Giving food does not make your life meaningful unless, being Gandhi or giving food to the homeless is what you want to do. Someone might want to be a painter and does not think about giving food to the homeless. Does that make the painter any less meaningful or significant? I don&#39;t think so. The meaning comes to the painters life by being a painter. If a painter wanted to be a painter but had to be a baker then the painters life would have lost meaning.

[cubist]

i don&#39;t live fearing death, i live yes i will die yes there is no fear in dying, its the only certain thing,

AT if the painter wanted to be a painter but became blind so he was not a painter is his life less meaningful? becuase you say it would have lost its meaning.

basically
people whos circumstances prevent them from doing theyre passion have meaningless lives??

exaplme

Edgar Davids a truly fantastic footballer, he is going blind becuase of gloecoma hence his orange glasses, he can save his eyes by taking drugs which would prevent him from playing football what would you do? he is still playing football

[The Feral Underclass]

Its an interesting point. I would say no, the painter looses no meaning because they still have the right to be a painter. It is a different thing being restricted from your meaning by force through political, religious or economic necessity that being effected by a natural accurence.

[ComradeRobertRiley]

Edgar Davids is my fav footballer of all time.

[iloveatomickitten]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2003, 12:12 AM
To hold the view that life is meaningless can be seen as pessamistc, so people seem to ignore the topic.

People avoid existential nihilism not because it&#39;s "pessamistic" but because it&#39;s so destructive and ultimatly would cause our extinction it goes against everything that evolution has created in us.

[The Feral Underclass]

I hope my thread didnt appear to be nihilistic. In fact I hoped it would be the complete opposite. Not all existentialists are nihilists. Satre was not so pessimistic.

[iloveatomickitten]

Your view isn&#39;t but the subject is closely linked.

For me searching for your personal meaning of existence doesn&#39;t give an answer it is just a remedy for the belief that there is no reason/meaning to anything. People avoid extream scepticism due to its apparent solution which is simply suicide, as living with the burden of total meaningless is somewhat impossible.
But if it is "truth" that you are after (some what paradoxically) nihilism can&#39;t simply ignored because its morbidity. I don&#39;t wish to offend anyone I view your attempt to find meaning as an attempt to avoid meaningless not to find any form of truth.
Though I do agree that people should do what makes effulgent but not out of pursuit of meaning but through the neglect of "reason" as nothing productive can ever ultimatly come from this, history is littered with destruction and decay the product of so called rational though (not for marxist though it&#39;s slavery fault).