Eps 387: The meaning of life of a small kid
— The too lazy to register an account podcast
| Host image: | StyleGAN neural net |
|---|---|
| Content creation: | GPT-3.5, |
Host
Terrance Rodriquez
Podcast Content
Simply to say that because people do not naturally have tension in their lives, they long for it and need entertainment in order to exist. Think of the intellectual discoveries of love - raising children, making music, and developing superior athletic skills - to name just a few.
In this literature, we find principles that aim to grasp other seemingly objective reasons for meaning. Although its proponents do not often use contemporary terminology to express the objective theory of what significant existence is, the perfectionist tradition can be understood as one of the most important and important aspects of human existence.
Most English-speaking philosophers who have written about the meaning of life have tried to develop and evaluate means to grasp the particular ways in which life could gain meaning. One of the most important tests of this theory is whether it captures the experiences, states, relationships, and actions that intuitively give meaning to life.
This theory has been divided into two main categories: supernaturalist theory and the type of properties that are considered to be meaningful. The theory of the supernaturalists states that the meaning of life must consist of certain relationships with the spiritual realm.
Supernaturalism focuses on the relationship between the physical world and the spiritual realm, such as God and soul. If there is no God or soul, then life is meaningless and one has no right relationship with it, or if it exists, life must be meaningless. Others attribute a centered view of life to a soul and think that the essence of physical existence must continue to live as we live, something that gives meaning to life.
The two naturalistic camps are at odds on whether these conditions are absolute and universal or whether the human mind makes sense. Naturalists who seek meaning outside the purely physical world that science knows fall into the subjectivist or objectivist category.
Objectivists may disagree that there is an absolute truth that has no value, but they can argue that it has more value than it does not in the context of the human mind.
The real paradox is not that people are so eager for personal happiness that they would choose to push it. The goal is to maximize happiness, as hedonists and certain types of utilitarianism do. This may be why the cost of a child and personal happiness is higher in the United States than in other countries.
This shows that we are sucking at predicting what will make us happy, as in Dan Gilbert's "Stumbling over happiness," and we value personal happiness less than other things, such as the meaning of life. First, whether a person's life has meaning is not the same as whether it is happy or pleasant.
Very few of us consider our experience of life in a virtual reality machine to be a prima facie candidate for meaningfulness. In fact, many would say that any talk of meaning excludes the significance that comes from time in the experience machine, even if there are a small handful who disagree and claim that they could conceivably be happy. Second, life could only have meaning if we sacrificed our happiness to help others at the expense of our own interests. A meaningful life is simply a pleasant life, and a meaningful life is simply a pleasant life.
Elon Musk's purpose in life could be to make futuristic ideas a reality, while my purpose can only be to make a good life for my family and children, or to make a futuristic idea a reality. My purpose in life is different from yours, because happiness is something that is unique to each individual. You can't copy and paste someone else's "sense of life" and expect to be happy to do the same.
Copying and pasting the purpose of someone you respect will probably leave you unhappy and unfulfilled, and that is not good for you.
Note that this is where I am aiming, and I will only mention the explanatory statement .
Subjectivists believe that there is no immutable standard of meaning, because meaning is relative to the subject, depending on the nature of its subject and its relationship to other subjects . If we believe that we have a significant existence, as we know it in science, then there must be a fundamental difference between what makes sense for the human mind and what is the meaning of life, which is even possible for many people. Now I turn to the question whether the conditions for meaning for man are invariant and even if they exist, what it means to be in the spiritual realm.