What doth life?

[bricklayer]

Meaning is part of human existence. Even the experience of the nihilist who believes there is no meaning is a form of meaningful experience. We all have some form or other of meaning, like knowing we are in a room, in a city, doing such and such etc.

For me one of the major problems about meaning is not the question as to whether there is any, because there is at least some, but rather the issue of what function does the experience of meaning serve from the evolutionary perspective? In theory we could all be robotic brains processing information on an unconscious level and have the same behavoural output, the same survival chances etc, but it seems that in practice that is not the case because we seem to have evolved conscious experience rather than a robotic "zombie" one. We know what difference having a meaning does to us existentially, it grounds our understanding and sense of purpose - but the whole question as to why in theory we are better of having conscious life remains unresolved.

Maybe this life where conscious experiece makes sense is one of an infinite variety in other universes where it does not, and the apparent necessity of a functional order to perception is just an illusion.

Or, we are created for the Creator's purpose.

 

[Tuddrussell]

Or, we are created for the Creator's purpose.

What purpose does rejecting the creator serve?

 

[quatona]

Or, we are created for the Creator's purpose.

So whatever we do can be assumed to serve this purpose.

 

[bricklayer]

What purpose does rejecting the creator serve?

There are two types of people in this world:
those who are examples of God's grace with the objects of His mercy and
those who are examples of God's patience with the objects of His wrath.

 

[Tuddrussell]

There are two types of people in this world:
those who are examples of God's grace with the objects of His mercy and
those who are examples of God's patience with the objects of His wrath.

I'm sorry God's patience? Patience doesn't lead to wrath, just the opposite really.

God is a bully.

 

[bricklayer]

So whatever we do can be assumed to serve this purpose.

I am left to believe that God's purpose for His creation is the revelation of His glory.
God's glory is His holiness, the inviolate balance of His infinite perfections.
God's purpose for His creation is the revelation of the inviolate balance of that which is attributable to God.
God chose to create exactly this creation, knowing it completely apart from its existence, because it serves His purpose perfectly.

God chose the creation with sin and salvation from sin to reveal, among other things, His grace and judgment, His mercy and wrath.

The only injustice possible, on an existential scale, would be for God to misrepresent Himself.
Anything less than a balanced representation of God's infinite perfections
would violate God's holiness and His purpose for His creation.

If the author has every right to do with his characters what ever he will,
always one person removed from the sins of his characters,
how much more does the Creator have evey right to do with His creatures whatever he wills?
No matter how humanly incalculable, the difference between an author and his characters is finite. The difference between the Creator and His creatures is infinite.
If an author has the right to do with his characters whatever he wills,
God has that right without limit.

God does no injustice to His creation.

 

[Tuddrussell]

We owe God nothing, he GAVE life to us. He did not lend us life, he did not lease us life, he did not rent out existence. No it was a gift, we should be grateful but that in no way makes us indebted to him.

No matter how powerful or infinite, God is not above reproach. If we are truly the children of God, that makes us the rightful heirs to reality. We can surpass our father, no, it is our right and destiny to surpass our father. Just as all children should strive to be greater than their parents.

So too must we strive to be greater than God! If God wants our love, our respect, our admiration... Then he should EARN it! Relationships need work, they need give and take. Why should we be the only ones who have to work at it?

Why does God have the authority to damn us to hell? Why can't we revolt? Send GOD to hell!? Surely he whose hands are stained with the blood of trillions deserves it more than we!? When has GOD asked US for forgiveness of HIS sins!? And why should we forgive him?

Why can't we elect a NEW god? A god of our own design, a god we can TRUST, a god on our side, who has OUR intrest at heart? A god who worships US as HIS creator?

God is a position, and heaven a kingdom. If we band together, our ARMIES can dethrone that TYRANT. A celestial revolution is in order.

Sic semper tyrannis!

 

[quatona]

If an author has the right to do with his characters whatever he wills,
God has that right without limit.

Apples and oranges.
But I´m amazed that you are the one who determines what rights god has.

 

[bricklayer]

Apples and oranges.
But I´m amazed that you are the one who determines what rights god has.

Truth is not determined, it is discovered.

 

[quatona]

Truth is not determined, it is discovered.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Propositional truth depends on sentences. Sentences are 'invented'. Therefore propositional knowledge depends on inventions.

Therefore we ought to be cautious about trusting sentences, and regarding them as components of klnowledge, because such inventions need not necessarily correspond to facts.

In fact as Kasparov said 'unfortunatelty there are more ways of doing something wrong that there are of doing it right'.

But how can we validate the sentence "life has meaning"?

 

[bricklayer]

Propositional truth depends on sentences. Sentences are 'invented'. Therefore propositional knowledge depends on inventions.

Therefore we ought to be cautious about trusting sentences, and regarding them as components of knowledge, because such inventions need not necessarily correspond to facts.

In fact as Kasparov said 'unfortunately there are more ways of doing something wrong that there are of doing it right'.

But how can we validate the sentence "life has meaning"?

All of creation is analogous to the Creator, it is not univocal to Him.
Truth is personal, God is, among other attributes, Truth.
His creation is analogous to Him, however it is finite and He is infinite,
therefore creation (even sentences) are but analogous to the Truth.

Material life is a process. It is not an assembly of material alone, but a prescribed sequence of material changes.
There is, I am left to believe, life apart from material life.
We are a complex of material actuality and potentiality, therefore we change materially.
This is the life process to which most refer.

There are, I am left to believe, two other types of life.
There are, I am left to believe, fully actualized potentialities (angels).
There is, I am left to believe, a simple actuality with no potentiality (God).

Necessary-Life has a simple meaning, with no potential for change or not exist.
Contingent-spiritual-life has a fully actualized complex meaning, with no potential for change.
Contingent-physical-life has a complex meaning of actual and potential for change and existence, (It's a process)

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Thats interesting, I have not read the medieval philosophers. Which do you prefer?