2 of 4
2
THERE IS NO LOGIC FOR EXISTENCE
Posted: 25 August 2007 11:27 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7613
Joined  2007-03-02

Scientifically, unless I missed something, no logical reason has been given as to why we exist.  Philosophically, though, I rack my brain to think of any philosopher who gave any logical explanation.  I can’t even recall if Descarte or Spinoza did or any other philosopher, but to resort to religion to answer this question doesn’t give a logical explanation either.  So Brahma was lonely and divided in two, had sex, and the universe was born. That’s not an answer.  To say God created us in His own image, sent his son because He loves us, killed his son violently because he loves us,  rolleyes  is not an answer either.  It is a grasping of answers that we do not have and resorting to primitive superstitions.  I honestly think there is no rational answer, as of yet.  To do so philosophically, however, would be like beating our heads against the wall and to do so religiously would be delusional (Fundamentalist wise) and “giving our own opinions, not God’s, about it” (liberal religious).  Either way, I don’t think it is possible to answer Philosophically or religiously for that matter.

[ Edited: 25 August 2007 11:31 AM by Mriana ]
 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 11:32 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15433
Joined  2006-02-14

Jufa, “logical reason” is redundant. What you want to say is that there is no reason for mankind or the universe to exist. In S.J. Gould’s words, if we turned back the clock on evolution, the next time we would not get humans here. We’d get something else.

But this doesn’t bother me at all. It’s like rolling a die and asking if there was some cosmic reason for me to get a five. No, it’s just dumb luck.

I expect that you are going to say that the existence of a God gives us a reason for all this to exist. But that’s a bad argument for any number of reasons.

First, there is no reason for God to exist. So it doesn’t answer the same question you want answered.

Second, if God exists, there is still no reason for the universe or us to exist. Clearly our existence causes a lot of pain, suffering and evil to exist in the world. This is all inconsistent with God’s existence, where God is taken as perfectly good. Put another way, were God to exist, the only thing reasonable for him to produce would be a perfectly good world, and that’s not this one.

If you have some other “exception” in mind, best to let us in on the big secret rather than leading us on.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 11:36 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  70
Joined  2007-08-05

Mriana, you are correct, there is no possible way either philosphical, religious, nor secular way to answer this question.  If one could answer this question intellectually, or spiritually, they would have found the meaning of life. 

Men cannot see what their minds do not comprehend.  This is also why all phases of life can be discussed philosophical.  This is why religion is taught in all platforms of teaching.

 Signature 

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength jufa

You are never alone!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 11:41 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7613
Joined  2007-03-02

Ok so if there is no way to answer this question, why ask it?

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 12:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  70
Joined  2007-08-05

The reality of why I ask it was for the very reason it prompted such a negative response.  To bring to one’s attention that regardless of what they may think, go, do, say, treat others, they are the greatest deceivers of themselves by believing their self-righteous centeredness has a meaning.  You see, in the final analysis, nothing we do we make sense to us because the grim reaper wipes all that an individual does completely away.  Nothing will matter to an individual when they are no more an entity in this dimension. 

One can say I left a legacy behind.  So what?  it will not change the sun from rising and setting, nor the wars and rumor of wars peersonally nor literally.  What is the logic to it all should be man’s only priority. 

You ask “Ok so if there is no way to answer this question, why ask it?  To prove it is an absolute truth in a world which states there is no absolute truth.

 Signature 

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength jufa

You are never alone!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 06:18 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  573
Joined  2007-08-21
jufa - 25 August 2007 12:02 PM

You see, in the final analysis, nothing we do we make sense to us because the grim reaper wipes all that an individual does completely away.

For one, I don’t know why you are using the present tense of the action “do” in this statement, for after death makes its round, there will be no individual to “do” anything. If you mean “the grim reaper wipes away all that an individual DID” that would still be false for all that an individual did in their life caused a chain reaction of events thereafter. Those footprints, if you will, are not wiped away by death. So if you are using this as your evidence that “nothing we do makes sense” then you are mistaken.

 Signature 

Vi veri veniversum vivus vici

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 07:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  672
Joined  2007-06-17

If the question was why do we exist, you should have stated that in your original question and I could have answered it: because we don’t not exist.  If you meant is there a purpose to our existence, then it depends on the individual if they don’t determine one for themselves then no, if they do then there purpose is that. If you meant is there a meaning of life, yes, there are several there are what i’ve decided my life means to me what your life means to me, and less certainly, what your life means to you and and what mine (or anyone else’s means to you).  All of these are easily and absolutely answerable they just need to be asked in a meaninguful manner.  If you mean why am I here, it’s because I’m not done yet, if you mean why are you here, that’s subject, of course, to whether you are here and whether here is here, and so on and so forth.  They are very easy questions all of these and none require a supernatural or irrational answer.

 Signature 

http://web.mac.com/normsherman/iWeb/Site/Podcast/833F918B-485B-42F4-B18C-4AB1436D9B87.html

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 07:13 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  573
Joined  2007-08-21
narwhol - 25 August 2007 07:02 PM

If the question was why do we exist, you should have stated that in your original question and I could have answered it: because we don’t not exist. 

narwhol - 25 August 2007 07:02 PM

because we don’t not exist. 

Is the double negative here intended or a mistake? If it’s intended, then you are saying the answer to why we exist is because we exist. That leaves me scratching my head. Can you please elaborate?

If it was not intended and you meant to say that we don’t exist, can you elaborate on this as well?

 Signature 

Vi veri veniversum vivus vici

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 07:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  70
Joined  2007-08-05

Man is always in the presence tense.  Death is always in the presence tense.  The only way you can deny this is to be dead.  If you are not dead, then then you can’t speak on what happens to when man no longer lives in a flesh body.  So to do is always a continuance of living even when one dies there is an activity.  That activity is “death gives to life so life can live.  Life gives to death so death can die.” 

Did not say death wipes aways all that anyone did.  I said what does it matter -there is that “do” again - to the one who can no longer participate in this world?  Let make this simple.  One of the riches men in America just died.  What does all that money mean to him?  What it means to those living in the flesh is that it keeps the circle of repetition going.

 Signature 

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength jufa

You are never alone!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 07:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  70
Joined  2007-08-05

Did not put forth:

If the question was why do we exist, you should have stated that in your original question and I could have answered it: because we don’t not exist.

My statement was, and still is, “There is no logic for existence.”  Also included in this statement is there is no purpose for existence.  If one cannot come forth with a logical reason for existence, one cannot assume a purpose without giving a logical reason for existence.

Your entire proposition hinges of purpose your assumption of the meaning of life.  This bring back the circle of there is no logic for meaning when there is no logic for existence.

 Signature 

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength jufa

You are never alone!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 07:37 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7613
Joined  2007-03-02
jufa - 25 August 2007 07:25 PM

Man is always in the presence tense.  Death is always in the presence tense.  The only way you can deny this is to be dead.  If you are not dead, then then you can’t speak on what happens to when man no longer lives in a flesh body.  So to do is always a continuance of living even when one dies there is an activity.  That activity is “death gives to life so life can live.  Life gives to death so death can die.” 

Did not say death wipes aways all that anyone did.  I said what does it matter -there is that “do” again - to the one who can no longer participate in this world?  Let make this simple.  One of the riches men in America just died.  What does all that money mean to him?  What it means to those living in the flesh is that it keeps the circle of repetition going.

Actually, death can be past tense, as in “His death was traumatic.”  But we are getting into grammer issues there.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 07:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  70
Joined  2007-08-05

Doug states;

Jufa, “logical reason” is redundant. What you want to say is that there is no reason for mankind or the universe to exist.

is this not what I’ve been saying all along?

Read it for yourself;

THERE IS NO LOGIC FOR ANYTHING IN THIS UNIVERSE TO EXIST. To be more percise, there is no logic to existence. Now this means all that exist in the universe should not be, and so, to deal with that which appears to be effect, will always lead one on only a spectculative journey on that which has no meaning.

Let’s step back from all our reading, personal analysis and interpretation and ask ourselves the question what is? In asking myself this question, I found the answer as followed. What is is, there is no logic to creation, therefore, there is no logic to the universe nor mankind. Being there is no logic to be found for creation nor the universe, then that which occupies the universe has no logic to exist inclusive of man. And being one cannot find intellectual reasoning, nor comprehension for existence, then there is no logic for that which should not be [man] to worship that which should not be [existence].

 Signature 

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength jufa

You are never alone!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 07:47 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  70
Joined  2007-08-05

Mriana stated;

Actually, death can be past tense, as in “His death was traumatic.” But we are getting into grammer issues there.

Bet it wasn’t past tense when it was taking place.  Recall makes it past tense.

 Signature 

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength jufa

You are never alone!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 07:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7613
Joined  2007-03-02

Thus we are getting into grammer issues, even man can be said in the past tense “Man was once primitive.”  This is a historical aspect.  As a writer, I have to consider these things every now and then.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 August 2007 08:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  70
Joined  2007-08-05

The man of today cannot be said to be past tense unless one recalls moments of the pass which, when occuring then was not past tense.  Are you past tense right now, and when is it that you, being alive in the present moment nullify that present moment are literally live in the past?  Not talking about where you are in mind, but where you take each and every breath from.

 Signature 

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength jufa

You are never alone!

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 4
2