Meaninglessness of science mathematics religion- EVERYTHING

[Tynan]

yes i do and so does dean

I think you have quoted the wrong part of Wiccan_Child's post.

I think you meant to answer the following:

Wiccan_Child's I question whether you actually believe this, or are playing the Devil's advocate.

Elspeth688 yes i do and so does dean.

I am not so sure that Dean does actually think this, I think, like Wiccan_Child pointed out, Dean is likely playing Devil's advocate.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

if logic has no purpose why did they use it to arive at there is no purpose

Purposeless is not the same as useless, in the terms of existentialism.

its purpose for them was to find truth and the truth they thought they found was was no purpose -self contradiction

Again, you misunderstand the existentialist's terminology.

they found meaning our purpose in no purpose or meaninglesness

I don't understand what this means.

thus their notions of bad faith freedom the whole existentialst dogma
pleanty of purpose and pleanty of self contradiction

Again, you misunderstand the existentialist's terminology.

 

[quatona]

dean is saying self-contradiction is the same as meaninglessness

Well, just because Dean says it it needn´t be accurate.

for if something is self contradictory it is nonses or meaningless

The meanings contradict each other. Without having meaning they couldn´t contradict.

dean is saying the existentalist notion of meaninglesness wil end in self contradiction

Well if it does, Dean´s notion does as well, according to his own reasoning. So he adds just another self-contradictory idea.

and self contradiction for dean is the samre as meaningless
he is useing meaningless in a diiif sense to them

If I would simply redefine words I could up with quite some funny theories as well.

 

[ConfusedTom]

meaningless = self contradiction
everything evenn the existentialist end in self contradiction
to escape from that
just get rid of the logic that generated the self-contradiction of EVERYTHING

u see the existentialist when they say the world was meaningless still thought that the logic they used to arrive at that idea had meaning and was a tool for truth -thus they fell into self contradiction
all they had to do instead of comiting sucide was just change there logic hahaha

By getting rid of the logic that brought you to the self-contradiction, you remove what that logic gave you: namely, the self-contradiction.

You're not throwing the baby out with the bathwater, you're throwing the bath water out while saying there never was a bath.

If Dean's goal is to prove that all thought based on logic is meaningless, then he'll have to use something other than logic to get there. You can't get there from here, as they say.

By way of parable:
"By building a working airplane, I'll prove to them all that human flight is impossible! But my proof will only be complete once I've made my airplane work!"

Doesn't quite fly.. in the literal or the logical sense.

Ditto for using human thought to prove that all human thought is meaningless. If the proof itself is meaningless then it's no proof, and therefore Dean hasn't proved that all human thought is meaningless. His "ship" sinks before he reaches the "shore" of his conclusion. You're presuming that he can cross the Atlantic on a ship that cannot float in the first place. Sorry, pal. His ship's got to do the work.

 

[JSynon]

I think the solution to this utterly suspenseful conundrum lies in the fact that all meaning is subjective (a creation, really). "Objective meaning" would be the apotheosis of oxymoron. Nihilism is only reached by mistakenly assuming that objective meaning is possible in the first place.