Origin of Earth

[dahermit]

Certainly, it is a better outlook than every man for himself.

Still, if mankind is as small, short lived, and insignificant as must be the case if we just happened to evolve out of the primeval ooze all on our own, with no other intelligence helping with the process and no purpose behind it all, what does it matter whether we continue to populate this small planet or not? Of what use is human life?

The same use as the hundreds of species that lived and died before us that we at best are only marginally aware (made no impact, their lives had no "meaning"). The Saber Tooth Cat, the Tulle Elk, the Giant Cave Sloth, etc., populated the earth for the same reason we have...because we do.
We are all as flowers of the field; we live for a season and then we die. There has been nothing (save wistful thinking), that would indicate anything different.

 

[PLC1]

The same use as the hundreds of species that lived and died before us that we at best are only marginally aware (made no impact, their lives had no "meaning"). The Saber Tooth Cat, the Tulle Elk, the Giant Cave Sloth, etc., populated the earth for the same reason we have...because we do.
We are all as flowers of the field; we live for a season and then we die. There has been nothing (save wistful thinking), that would indicate anything different.

Tule elk are still around, but yes, that's the point. Absent the existence of a human soul, and a creator who has some purpose for humanity, our existence is of no more consequence than any of the above, which is none at all. Humanity is no more important than a species of bacteria that existed, then died out without anyone even knowing it existed.

 

[orogenicman]

Certainly, it is a better outlook than every man for himself.

Still, if mankind is as small, short lived, and insignificant as must be the case if we just happened to evolve out of the primeval ooze all on our own, with no other intelligence helping with the process and no purpose behind it all, what does it matter whether we continue to populate this small planet or not? Of what use is human life?

But life, all life, has it's own purpose, does it not? To survive and reproduce, thus continuing the great chain of evolving life? Right? Do we not treasure our children more than anything else?

 

[PLC1]

But life, all life, has it's own purpose, does it not? To survive and reproduce, thus continuing the great chain of evolving life? Right? Do we not treasure our children more than anything else?

Certainly, but perhaps that's just a survival trait inherited from our ancestors, as meaningless as reproducing more meaningless life forms.

 

[dahermit]

But life, all life, has it's own purpose, does it not? To survive and reproduce, thus continuing the great chain of evolving life? Right? Do we not treasure our children more than anything else?

Actually, no. Some cultures value their cultural moires more than their own children and will sacrifice their children those moires. For instance, some Muslims will mutilate or kill their female children for offenses. Likewise, In some instances Northern Irish have been known to encourage their imprisoned children to stay on hunger strikes until dead. So, just for the record, in some cultures, children are not valued more than anything else.

 

[dahermit]

Tule elk are still around, but yes, that's the point. Absent the existence of a human soul, and a creator who has some purpose for humanity, our existence is of no more consequence than any of the above, which is none at all. Humanity is no more important than a species of bacteria that existed, then died out without anyone even knowing it existed.

Yes, that is the point. There is no scientific evidence that there is any purpose for humanity or we are of any more consequence than any other species. Further, it is hard to come up with any rationalization for the deaths of 30 million or so that died as the result of WWII. Of what purpose could their deaths have served for the creator? Or, is it more logical that it was a "meaningless" event orchestrated by a despot for no divine purpose? To the religious, they will repeat the tedious: "...we cannot know what divine purpose that God...".

In short, the day will come when all evidence of human habitation will have crumbled to dust on this planet and the only thing remaining will be a few strange fossils of an ape-like species that died out long ago.

 

[PLC1]

Yes, that is the point. There is no scientific evidence that there is any purpose for humanity or we are of any more consequence than any other species. Further, it is hard to come up with any rationalization for the deaths of 30 million or so that died as the result of WWII. Of what purpose could their deaths have served for the creator? Or, is it more logical that it was a "meaningless" event orchestrated by a despot for no divine purpose? To the religious, they will repeat the tedious: "...we cannot know what divine purpose that God...".

In short, the day will come when all evidence of human habitation will have crumbled to dust on this planet and the only thing remaining will be a few strange fossils of an ape-like species that died out long ago.

Yes, and absent a creator who has a purpose for having created life, no one will care.

It is not deaths that serve a purpose for the creator, but lives. Throughout our lives, we learn and grow, and to what end? When we die, does it all die with us? If so, then we are of no consequence.

I suppose the logical conclusion to the purposlessness of life is to live for the moment only, as past and future are meaningless.

 

[dahermit]

I suppose the logical conclusion to the purposlessness of life is to live for the moment only, as past and future are meaningless.

That is only one logical conclusion. There can be many conclusions. For instance, even though life has no divine purpose, one would feel good about one's self if they were a contributing member of society that sought to better the lives of all members. I would not seek to put words in the mouths of others however, inasmuch as I do not know what others may conclude.

 

[PLC1]

That is only one logical conclusion. There can be many conclusions. For instance, even though life has no divine purpose, one would feel good about one's self if they were a contributing member of society that sought to better the lives of all members. I would not seek to put words in the mouths of others however, inasmuch as I do not know what others may conclude.

What is the point of contributing to society, if that society has no meaning or purpose? That seems to me to be the same thing as living for the moment: Feeling that you are a contributing member of society makes you feel good in this moment, but actually has no meaning if that society has no meaning.

 

[dahermit]

What is the point of contributing to society, if that society has no meaning or purpose? That seems to me to be the same thing as living for the moment: Feeling that you are a contributing member of society makes you feel good in this moment, but actually has no meaning if that society has no meaning.

The purpose of a society (otherwise there would be more hermits), is that they all benefit from the interaction. It affords things that cannot be gotten from one's own resources. Street lights, paved roads, police protection, potential mates for our children, etc.

Also, consider that the only people in the world that have time to ponder the question of the meaning of life, are those who are wealthy enough to have the time to think about it. The less fortunate, I suspect, are struggling to survive and would not likely have the energy to worry about anything but where tomorrow's bread is coming from. I wonder how often a child laborer in Bangkok wonders about the meaning of life.

 

[dahermit]

What is the point of contributing to society, if that society has no meaning or purpose? That seems to me to be the same thing as living for the moment: Feeling that you are a contributing member of society makes you feel good in this moment, but actually has no meaning if that society has no meaning.

Through the years, evidence of societies that existed long before us has been found, many of which do not appear in present historical records. What meaning or purpose did those societies have when the only trace of their having existed are grown-over and filled in canals and pottery shards. Many of these have had no impact on current societies other than food for study. It is what it is; some of us can live with that.

Just for the fun of it, ask people you know where the Etruscan civilization was located relative to the modern world. It was one of the ancient civilizations that supposedly had an impact upon our art. I would wager that only one in a thousand would know or care. (answer: Italy, underneath the Roman Empire.)

 

[PLC1]

The purpose of a society (otherwise there would be more hermits), is that they all benefit from the interaction. It affords things that cannot be gotten from one's own resources. Street lights, paved roads, police protection, potential mates for our children, etc.

Also, consider that the only people in the world that have time to ponder the question of the meaning of life, are those who are wealthy enough to have the time to think about it. The less fortunate, I suspect, are struggling to survive and would not likely have the energy to worry about anything but where tomorrow's bread is coming from. I wonder how often a child laborer in Bangkok wonders about the meaning of life.

A child laborer in Bangkok is self aware, just like everyone else, and so aware of the future. A child may not be into the idea of mortality, but will be should he grow to adulthood.

The fact that there are children in this world just struggling to survive, while most of us live in plenty, is one of those things most of us would like to change, but why? If in the end it is just ashes to ashes and dust to dust, with no one caring or even aware that the child and the wealthy tourist walked the streets of a forgotten city once called Bangkok, what does it matter?

If one ant walks proudly on six legs, while another has lost two and is walking in circles, does it matter?

 

[PLC1]

Through the years, evidence of societies that existed long before us has been found, many of which do not appear in present historical records. What meaning or purpose did those societies have when the only trace of their having existed are grown-over and filled in canals and pottery shards. Many of these have had no impact on current societies other than food for study. It is what it is; some of us can live with that.

Yet, if the inhabitants of those forgotten cities live on in another life, having learned and grown while in a mortal existence, then their lives and what they did with them matter. If not, it is of no consequence which was a faithful husband, which a wastrel, who was thrown into prison and who was the jailer. It is over, no longer in existence, forgotten and no more important than a termite mound that has been raided by an anteater.

 

[orogenicman]

it is not the end or the purpose in life that matters. what matters is the jouney itself. life well lived is worth living, whether it has a larger meaning or not. what matters is that it had meaning for the person who lived it.

sorry about the spelling. i had surgery on my left shoulder today.

 

[PLC1]

it is not the end or the purpose in life that matters. what matters is the jouney itself. life well lived is worth living, whether it has a larger meaning or not. what matters is that it had meaning for the person who lived it.

sorry about the spelling. i had surgery on my left shoulder today.

I hope your surgery was successful.

Yes, a life well lived is better than one not well lived, certainly it is more enjoyable.

I'll live my life as well as I possibly can, and hope you do the same. When it is over, there either will or won't be a life after death. If I'm right, and there is more than our earthly existence, then I'll look you up to say I told you so. If you're right, and we simply cease to exist, then neither of us will ever know it.