Toughest Philosophical Questions

I have to go out now, but I would like, briefly, to note that my criticism of "common sense" was meant partly in jest. Without "common sense" we would not have the everyday colloquial undestandings necessary for group survival. It is what culture does for communities: shared understandings makes interaction and orderly relations possible. Nevertheless, we need to encourage "uncommon" understandins and perspectives, what we sometimes calling thinking (and being) outside the box of mediocrity.

. . . NO - IT CAN NOT BE PROVEN ( THERE ARE MORE THAN ONE GOD - YOU KNOW ) WHICH GOD ARE YOU ASKING ME TO ELABORATE ON ( A MAN MADE GOD ( LIKE BAAL ) WHICH HAS A SMALL G ) AND IT IS USUALLY SOMETHING THATS MAN MADE & CAN BE SEEN WITH THE NAKED EYE ( BUT THE GOD THAT I SERVE - HIS EXISTANCE HAS A BIG G ) AND I DO NOT HAVE TO PROVE THAT MY GOD EXIST ( ALL I HAVE TO DO ) IS TO HAVE FAITH THAT HE EXIST - AND THAT IS ENOUGH FOR ME - AS IT WERE . . .

BUMP

Were meant to seek out our own purpose to life.

@Deftil

What does it mean to be human?
If the feeling of anger was a texture, could it be soft?
And will the dark side of people ever be accepted if it doesn't hurt people?

I respect your viewpoint and please do not take anything that I share as hateful But if I worship Ganesha how is your God any different than mine?

ahaaaa. it cannot be determined because our experiences of consciousness are different. through association we can recognise other peoples descriptions of their experience. e.g. someone tells you they saw an eagle. you visualise what you see as an eagle. language allows us to share experiences. i watched a BBC Horizon documentary, which i think is on their youtube channel, about colour. we ALL see colour differently, and some cultures are blind to some colours. there is an african tribe that cannot see blue, they see it as orange, or what each of us individually would call orange. i may be wrong about the exact colours. look for the documentary, it explains it better than i ever could lol. but that for me proves that each of us experience consciosness differently. individual personality also points in this direction.

if we could experience someone elses consciousness, would we recognise anything?

never u would recognize but evil life

other consciousness is another limit another finite perspective, then u as a limited definition is free as else from what is objectively known, then only limit exist absolutely then u as an absolute finite so evil is living, existin free absolutely as nothing else exist

ur sick insistance to prove being above truth and the source of else existence in life, is never about ur limits it is about u always
smthg will stop that for sure otherwise i wont b seein it so clearly and havin all tools to make it appearent objectively through all forms of right terms

but what matter is what we endure of u and ur gods when u dont matter at all now and ever

first of all i dont think you understood a word of what i said. if it helps, you didnt exactly make a lot of sense yourself, but english may not be your first language so it's not for me to criticise.

however..."ur sick insistance to prove being above truth"...erm...excuse me? my what? even if i was above the truth i could never prove it, as the best anyone else can hope for is the truth, never mind that "truer than true" doesnt exist, which is essentially what "above the truth" means.
at no point did i try to force my opinion on anyone.

think before you type.

talk to urself retarded head

as if truth must b absolute all and everything moron, truth is anything u know existing before ur eyes, and i repeat, u r an evident lover of being over truth

inventin facts like imagining observin other thinking and willin to draw conclusions from that imagination, instead of meanin smthg really existin alone showin itself clearly like anything, is more then willin to step over truth nature of being u

sorry but you are an idiot. i'm done with you.

Always wondered..

What is a baby's very first thought?
&
What connections do they make in their minds as they gather intelligence after having that first thought?

why ur questions are so retarded, dont u ever feel ashame of being insolent to conscious use??? there is a level of truth out there everywhere u cant mean any existence sense without respectin it

a baby cannot have a thought, bc a thought is after seein an absolute reality of existence which is after being real itself so not in needs of any thing or milkies

then after being the child could translate his self freedom from being by usin thoughts realms as a quick realisation of self mind
till it gets free from that too if it stays honest in willin to b himself truly and not as a pretense for others inferiority uses

to your question "Is there a purpose to as as humans?'


Each individual person is so unique that it is impossible for one to definitively say what the purpose of another’s life is. Every person has influential factors in their life that push them towards or pull them away from their dreams, goals, and aspirations. Environmental circumstances, moral standards, codes of ethics, and self-evaluations play such a large role in out lives and who we become. As a human being each of us have our own purpose that strive to fulfill which is completely independent from any other individual or humanity as a whole. When we truly consider what makes us happy? What makes us scared? What gives us courage? What makes us who we are as a person? Only then will we be able to find what our individual purpose is. We were not born with a set destiny, or a divine “to do list” or with our decisions already made, in fact it’s the exact opposite. As an individual we choose our own purpose, we define for ourselves what our destiny is.

Many people say that we don’t have a purpose or our purpose was some kind of divine choice made even before our conception, but the truth is we make our own way in this world. With that being said, life is rarely straightforward and clear, and it is never easy. That is the reason for so much of the self-doubt in humanity. So many people are afraid to look inside themselves, take inventory, then act upon what they find.

at the very least we are a vessel for energy, and therefore perform a vital role in the universe, although it could be argued that energy cannot be lost, it just gets transferred to a different medium, therefore rendering us obsolete, as the energy has to exist no matter where, or how.
but i suppose as long as we ARE alive, then we ARE vessels for energy, and therefore DO have a purpose. not very spiritual though is it??? :p

I like your idea about "energy." Makes sense beyond the other philosophical ideas.

there is a theory that if all matter is energy vibrating at different frequencies, then we are essentially made of sound. i'm no maths whizz believe me. as i say in my profile all i understand (or think i understand) is in laymans terms, so don't ask me for the maths lol.

anyway, i like this idea, as it means we are part of a giant orchestra, in harmony with everything in the universe, right down to the last particle.

but maybe we have no free will, or don't make our own decisions.
there are a few possible (and plausible) theories which could strip us of freewill, and decision making. two of these are:

the multiverse: in an infinite multiverse made up of a finite set of fundamental particles, entire universes repeat infinitely, along with ALL POSSIBLE variations (imagine dealing out an infinite number of packs of shuffled playing cards. because each pack consists of only 52 cards, at some point, more than once, infinitely even, you would deal a pack in order). therefore anything possible exists infinitely. if we "make" a decision, then by extension, all possible variations of us need to also take every possible decision. this removes choice, as all roles have to be filled, so the last one (not that there could ever be a "last one" but for the sake of this analogy...)the last one cannot say "no thankyou". something must accept it. it could be that we are a fluke, and the only universe to be made up exactly as it is,to the last particle, and for one possible universe to not exist yet by one particle, but when we are talking of infinite proportions, our choices are so small as to be rendered obsolete. one TINY variation, one particle, is all it takes but in an infinity of variations, the probability is even smaller.

time and space: according to einstein time IS space. if time is space, then time is everywhere, and space is everywhen. this means the past exists everywhere, and everywhen, as do present and future. this in turn means the future already exists everywhere, again rendering choice obsolete.

in both these scenarios our destinies are pre-determined.

Destiny is a predetermined list of events. So you're saying that the predetermined list of events are predetermined? What do you think of predetermined list of events which are predetermined that is predetermined? Maybe possible if you believe in multiple levels of deity predetermining each other. But don't take what I said up to now seriously. I was just pulling your leg.
Einstein saw spacetime as a dimension, where time and space are inseparably linked. So technically although time may be a dimension, it is not exactly the same as space which I think is intuitively obvious.
If you really want to get on the destiny wagon, you might wanna pull out the causality card from your pocket.
And what's with the multiverse theory? Sure multiverse theory tells you that you can go back in time, and the timeline you arrive at is no longer the same timeline as the one you left, but it is debatable whether or not random microscopic events actually affect the macroscopic causality that is a part of our everyday world. There is no solid evidence by science to prove what you're going on about. I've read a few articles where the macroscopic world can in fact be influenced by microscopic events (ex. macroscopic resonance in circuits due to quantum tunneling of electrons). My general 'philosophical' opinion is that the macroscopic world behaves largely independently of microscopic events, and can therefore be referred to as 'causal'. This being the case, the future of a planet is largely laid out by causal events. If you want to refer to this large-scale causality as 'fate' or 'destiny' beware that you are beginning to cross the line into discussions outside the realm of 'science' and this topic quickly becomes something you'll have to wrestle with yourself. My two cents anyway.