Toughest Philosophical Questions

I agree our country has pushed human rights and many other essential things relating to the well being of humanity but by the same token has also hurt many other populations in the process. Utilitarianism at its core. But this is not what I was discussing. Sure we have advanced at a semi consistent pace as a human hole, discovering new things about the universe we dwell in. I simply feel that even after all of these accomplishments we attained, it still reflects no purpose. Purpose in the context where we were designed to do so. I feel humankind being the higher intellect of our planet, do these things out of curiosity and a yearning for greater knowledge not out of purpose. I'm not saying life has nothing to offer, I just don't see how we all have a universal purpose to advance forward and if it is our purpose we are currently moving backwards with all the issues currently taking place, and how we respond to such events. I said before we may have an individual purpose set in mind by ourselves but these appear to me more as goals than purposes. Same with the global interest in advancing humankind intellectually and economically.

When you say "global purpose," it seems as though all peoples needs to meet some higher purpose in life. I find that unrealistic, and unattainable.

Most humans only impact those they come in contact with during their life on earth. Some, through no fault of their own live very short lives; nature, nurture, chance, genes, health, and environment are the primary directives of our lives. Some live more productive lives than others; some not much.

Personal satisfaction, survival, and our drive for what matters to us provides the motivation for what we seek and want out of our life. As I've said before, where we were born and the environment have direct impact on what we can achieve.

Expectation and the degree to which it was accomplished is what matters.

Yes, When I say global purpose I mean exactly that. You agree with me on that I see, as I did Say I don't believe humans have a designed purpose whether it be designed from some "creator" or just built into us at birth. it's obvious the environment we grow up in have effects on who we become later in life but again the whole point of my posts were to illustrate my view that humankind has no distinct purpose. Not as a whole at least. And any purpose an individual has is more like a life goal rather than a purpose. We weren't made to accomplish something. We exist, and that's that, IMO.

as you said our personal satisfaction, survival, and our drive for what matters to us provides motivation for what we seek (our goals, not purposes) so in a sense you are just agreeing with me. If so I did not realize you were agreeing with me intentionally, otherwise I apologize for my assumption just now.

the posts you reply are simply adjacent to mine. They point out things that just go along with my statements. Are opinions on the matter are similar.

First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today.

Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to hell. since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in hell to increase exponentially. now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in hell because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in hell to stay the same, the volume has to expand proportionately as souls are added.

This gives two possibilities:
1. If hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter hell, then the temperature and pressure in hell will increase until all hell breaks loose.

2. If hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until hell freezes over.

So which is it?

If we accept the postulate given to me by a girl during my freshman year that, "it will be a cold day in hell before i sleep with you" and take into account that i slept with her last night, then number two must be true, and thus i am sure that Hell is exothermic and has already frozen over. The corollary of this theory is that since hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more souls and is therefore extinct....leaving only Heaven, thereby proving the existence of a divine being which explains why, last night, that girl kept shouting "oh my god"




This was meant for you to laugh not to be serious jsyk lmao

Yeah, and to think this planet's human population is approaching seven billion "souls" makes hell a common place for most of us.

For the question " why is there something rather nothing?" I think the answer I'd why not

What is purpose?

What is beyond space?

For the question " why is there something rather than nothing?" I believe th answer is why not?

If we are figments of imagination does it truly change anything?

Man is what it chooses to be

Are we so incapable that we can not find purpose on out own?

Perhaps it is for the same reason that the universe in without end.

Man's an IT???... I guess that explains mankinds impotence...

What is 'IS'?

is what !

Very original, buddy. You didn't steal that off of someone else, now did you? Perhaps it was the answer by a student to a bonus question on a physics midterm given by Washington University.

Very original, though, buddy.

I have this one based on religion; How can we have the free choice if you believe in the premises that God knew everything before it had ever existed

simple, we can´t...
...what is truly meant with "choice", is concordance in turn, that is, we are compelled to like what we like...of course religious theologians try to avoid such conclusions at any cost...
...if it is the case that there is cause and effect and not just correlations in between phenomena free will does not exists nor does it make any sense to go by the soft deterministic approach...its utter crap !

Interesting point: god knew everything before it happened, yet he claims he provided "free will" to humans. There's a contradiction that is illogical to the extreme.

Do you think a god, as humans define It, would be limited by the principles of logic as we understand them?