A search for meaning...

[__Xzyx987X]

Why am I such a pessimist? I actually ask myself this a lot. For some reason, I just naturally am one, even though I don't really want to be. I wasn't always a pessimist though. There was a time when I had quite optimistic beliefs, such as the existance of God, the belief that life had some specific meaning, and the belief that there truely was such a thing as happiness. But over the years, these beilefs faded. It was partly because life dissapointed me so often I learned not to expect much. It wasn't that I really had a though time of it. I had all the opportunities in the world to succeed. But I turned every one of them down, because no matter which path I followed I could never see happiness at the end. So right now, I'm sitting here, wondering what the heck I should be doing with my life.

The way I see it, I have a few options. The first would be just to kill myself right now, Personally, I don't have much reason left to be attached to my own life, but I still find this option rather unthinkable. For one thing, I have no desire to hurt those who have loved and supported me over the years, even though I rarely returned their kindness. And secondly, I don't have the guts to do it, even if I wanted to. Which actually makes me feel worse in a way...

The second option, would be to keep on living a life in which I find neither meaning, nor happiness, nor purpose. I've looked for all of those things in every place possible, but I never found a single one. Instead, I found a a sea of selfishness and meaningless indulgence.

Now, you might look at my perception of life and see someone obviosly suffering from a case of depression. Maybe I am, but frankly I think I have reason to be. When I look at other people happily going about their lives, ignorant of the lack of meaning in what they're doing, I feel disgusted. More than half the people I see are nothing but walking reproduction devices. Their lives serve no greater meaning that to have children just for the sake of passing on a legacy of mediocrity. Then there are the few who actually do try to accomplish some higher purpose, but even those people are only fooling themselves. All their actions would amount to nothing if the earth were to be destoyed by a meteor tommorow. If that were to happen, nothing humans had ever done would matter. And yet depite this, they still stuggle to keep on living. If for nothing else, then for the sake of living.

But wait, what does it matter anyway? Even if human beings can never accomplish anything beyond their own irrelevant little lives, isn't it enough to live for the sake of what is possible to accomplish in whatever situation you're in? Perhaps that is all one can hope for? Let me put it to you this way. A Buddist would say the purpose of life is to free yourself from desire. I say there's a faster way; just kill yourself and the desire will instantly dissapear. Why struggle to live when life is nothing but a path to death? Why, when there is nothing you can do in life that will ever matter?

Is it for the sake of other people? Is kindness to other truely a greater purpose? At the least we can establish that influnce on other people is the greatest thing a human can ever achieve. It is nonetheless, unsatisfying to me to think affecting people who are as meaningless as I am is all I can do. Anyway, doing things for the sake of others only feeds their own selfish desires, which will cause them to expect more in the future and have a harder time being content with what they have. Doing things for yourself has the same result though, so why bother with either one? Why bother to exist at all?

Since the dawn of man, we have stuggled to make our lives easier. This has in effect, been our true higher purpose. Some have suggested the path of alturism, others selfishness. Some have suggested using advanced technology, others have suggested simplicity. But in the end, all are equally futile. People never seem to be content with what they have. Howvever, it is only when you learn to be content with what you have that you find rest from the eternal struggle. But then, why should you want to have anything at all? Why is something better than nothing? Especially if having something will only fuel your desire for more.

The truth of the matter is, people don't have any real reason to live at all. People live, because they are driven to live by their own instincts, the same as any animal. They are driven to build lives, create stability, reproduce, and die for no reason, over and over again by a force which they don't control. And they don't even attempt to control it, they just justify it. They idealise every aspect of human life, tieing in concepts of beauty and purpose. All because they can't logically justify their own desires.

I have thoughts like this all the time, and I can't reconcile them with any sense of humanity I have left. Instead I just continue to move through life, playing the cards I'm dealt, without any ambition or accomplishment. I can't decide whether it would be better to just believe the lies that make everyone else happy, or continue on, miserable, but with the knoledge that I am not fooling myself about what life really is.

So what do you think? Is my perception of the world really off? Do you see any greater purpose in life that truely gives it meaning for you. If so, then please tell me, because I'm getting very tired of living a meaningless existance.

EDIT: Just noticed this was my 666th post. Seems almost fitting...

[Boltzmann]

Your post brings me a bunch of memories that I'm not so fond of. That's because I've experienced a lot of the existential doubts that you describe. Apparently, the biggest difference between you and me is that I actually attempted suicide (about 3 years and a half ago).

Now, don't think that I'll come with a self-help style post, where I'll show that life has an ultimate meaning and how the universe is kind and everything has its place.

For starters, there's no god, and no teleological purpose to life. But this shouldn't worry you. You see, once Nietzsche realized that god is dead, his philosophy got a lot more interesting.

Reading your arguments, I can see that you got the premises right (i.e. no god, no ultimate purpose), but the inferences are wrong. Just because we aren't part of a vaporous entity's Grand Plan doesn't make our life meaningless, and doesn't make all options equal to each other.

Allow me to explain. I'm sure there're certain things that could happen right now that would make you feel a lot worse. For instance, your mother could die (if she's already dead, substitute it for another person whose death would sadden you).

And I'm sure that you don't think that eating a candy bar would be equally pointless as killing your mother. So you think that eating candy is better than matricide. What is it that allows you to make such judgement? Think about it carefully, and you'll see that you can assign expected utilities to different actions, different paths you take in your life. Now think harder, and try to guess where the utility function(s) that allow you to assign such expected utilities come from in the first place. (And you'll quickly realize that these utilities are not arbitrary - at least the important ones).

As for myself, I've reached the conclusion that the these utility functions are me. The fact that I like Iron Maiden and hate Linkin Park is determined by such a function. And since the coherent, centralized self is just an illusion, I'm just a collection of utility functions that are ultimately grounded in my brain's wetware.

Borrowing an analogy from Steven Pinker, have you ever seen Woody Allen's excellent movie Annie Hall? Well, you're making the same mistake as one of the characters in the movie. The dialogue goes like this:

Mrs Felix: Why don't you do your homework?
Allen Felix: The Universe is expanding. Everything will fall apart, and we'll all die. What's the point?
Mrs Felix: We live in Brooklyn. Brooklyn is not expanding! Go do your homework.

And she's right. Even though the universe will end in a heat death, this doesn't lessen the value of our lives. It doesn't matter that we've no value to the universe - we have value for ourselves. This is good enough for me.

There's no intrinsic meaning to anything. What is music, for instance? Just wave patterns in the air. They're meaningful only to our human ears. A rock attaches no value whatsoever to music, because it cannot attach value to anything. Neither can a worm, since it has no hearing at all. An insect could hear it, but it's brain can't attach any significance to it, because it's too simple. Only our human minds (I'm not being anthropocentric, you can substitute "human" for any sufficiently complex mind-in-general) can listen to a song and then say "hey, this is a nice song".

A car is nothing more than a bunch atoms arranged in a particular pattern, just like a snowflake. But I'm sure that you'll attach greater value to a car than to a snowflake. But to the universe and the laws of physics, it's all the same. Meaning is inside ourselves, and how we perceive the world. Aleister Crowley, in his book Eight Lectures on Yoga says:

Let us consider a piece of cheese. We say that this has certain qualities, shape, structure, colour, solidity, weight, taste, smell, consistency and the rest; but investigation has shown that this is all illusory. Where are these qualities? Not in the cheese, for different observers give quite different accounts of it. Not in ourselves, for we do not perceive them in the absence of the cheese. All 'material things,' all impressions, are phantoms.

In reality the cheese is nothing but a series of electric charges. Even the most fundamental quality of all, mass, has been found not to exist. The same is true of the matter in our brains which is partly responsible for these perceptions. What then are these qualities of which we are all so sure? They would not exist without our brains; they would not exist without the cheese. They are the results of the union, that is of the Yoga, of the seer and the seen, of subject and object in consciousness as the philosophical phrase goes. They have no material existence; they are only names given to the ecstatic results of this particular form of Yoga.

Now substitute the word Yoga for qualia and you'll get a fine piece of philosophy. (BTW, don't get carried away by the philosophical investigations on the nature of qualia. They're all way off the mark - just read some Dennett.)

As for other people, you're right. Most of them walk around unaware that there's even a problem to be dealt with. They're completely oblivious to it, and just go around doing as their genes say. But this shouldn't bother you too much. After all you should be thanking them for the food at your table, and the clothes you wear. No matter what else they may be, they do add value to our society and make our modern lives possible.

In the end, I think that with technological improvement and increasing wealth, people will eventually come to think about these problems, and we'll eventually be better than well. It maybe too optimistic, but at least I'm willing to try. We've seen big improvements since the Middle Ages (at least in raw numbers).

My advice, for what it's worth: find out what is it that makes you tick, and what's worth striving for. And don't tell me that everything is worthless and every path has equal value, because you know this isn't true (or else you would think that killing your mother and eating a candy bar are equally good actions). And don't worry about whether your efforts will endure through time or not. Do your best now, and let history decide.

BTW, you're probably depressed. I used to think that I wasn't, but I've learned to recognize the symptons (at least in myself). It's not that bad, and it doesn't make you worse than anyone else.

For a singularitarian view on this stuff, see the FAQ about the Meaning of Life, by Eliezer Yudkowsky. Maybe you won't agree with everything he says (and maybe you'll disagree with most of what he says), but it'll give you some food for thought nonetheless.

(And sorry if my post is confusing or badly written. As you know, english is not my first language, and this post is too big).

[__Xzyx987X]

Thanks for replying Boltzmann. Somehow I had a feeling this thread would catch you're attention. I understand and agree with a lot of what you had to say. It really did make me feel a bit better. But there are still some areas where I have my doubts.

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

Allow me to explain. I'm sure there're certain things that could happen right now that would make you feel a lot worse. For instance, your mother could die (if she's already dead, substitute it for another person whose death would sadden you).

No, she isn't dead, although I'd be lying if I said she was my favorite person in the world. She's always been the kind of person you can't get close to emotionally. At least unless it's on her terms. I'm the same way though, so who am I to complain? Still, her attitude has had a big negative impact on my psyche. I don't want to get too deep into that matter though.

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

And I'm sure that you don't think that eating a candy bar would be equally pointless as killing your mother. So you think that eating candy is better than matricide. What is it that allows you to make such judgement? Think about it carefully, and you'll see that you can assign expected utilities to different actions, different paths you take in your life. Now think harder, and try to guess where the utility function(s) that allow you to assign such expected utilities come from in the first place. (And you'll quickly realize that these utilities are not arbitrary - at least the important ones).

Perhaps not, but just because something isn't arbitrary doesn't mean it has a significant meaning or purpose.

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

As for myself, I've reached the conclusion that the these utility functions are me. The fact that I like Iron Maiden and hate Linkin Park is determined by such a function. And since the coherent, centralized self is just an illusion, I'm just a collection of utility functions that are ultimately grounded in my brain's wetware.

Borrowing an analogy from Steven Pinker, have you ever seen Woody Allen's excellent movie Annie Hall? Well, you're making the same mistake as one of the characters in the movie. The dialogue goes like this:

Mrs Felix: Why don't you do your homework?
Allen Felix: The Universe is expanding. Everything will fall apart, and we'll all die. What's the point?
Mrs Felix: We live in Brooklyn. Brooklyn is not expanding! Go do your homework.

And she's right. Even though the universe will end in a heat death, this doesn't lessen the value of our lives. It doesn't matter that we've no value to the universe - we have value for ourselves. This is good enough for me.

That is what I came to believe as well, but somehow it never comforted me. I wanted life to be something more than that. It's not easy for me to accept that the value of existance is limited to that which we give it. It's just a matter of one meaningless thing giving meaning to another. By definition such a thing isn't possible. If one thing has no meaning, than any meaning it tries to give to something else shouldn't have meaning either.

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

There's no intrinsic meaning to anything. What is music, for instance? Just wave patterns in the air. They're meaningful only to our human ears. A rock attaches no value whatsoever to music, because it cannot attach value to anything. Neither can a worm, since it has no hearing at all. An insect could hear it, but it's brain can't attach any significance to it, because it's too simple. Only our human minds (I'm not being anthropocentric, you can substitute "human" for any sufficiently complex mind-in-general) can listen to a song and then say "hey, this is a nice song".

A car is nothing more than a bunch atoms arranged in a particular pattern, just like a snowflake. But I'm sure that you'll attach greater value to a car than to a snowflake. But to the universe and the laws of physics, it's all the same. Meaning is inside ourselves, and how we perceive the world.

Let me ask you this; if the meaning lies in how we percieve the world, doesn't it then depend on the quality of the perciver? If the perciever is nothing but a walking biochemical victim of predeterminism, then what does that say for the value of the perception? To me it doesn't seem it could possibly be anything worthwhile. Even if my percetions tell me something has value, how can I believe it if I don't value my own perceptions?

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

My advice, for what it's worth: find out what is it that makes you tick, and what's worth striving for. And don't tell me that everything is worthless and every path has equal value, because you know this isn't true (or else you would think that killing your mother and eating a candy bar are equally good actions). And don't worry about whether your efforts will endure through time or not. Do your best now, and let history decide.

I'm not arguing that everything has equal value, I'm arguing that nothing has significant value. Even if there is something inside me that tells me certain things have better value that others, it makes no difference if I don't believe myself. Hmm... saying that makes the word "doublethink" come to mind. But that's still the way I feel about it.

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

BTW, you're probably depressed. I used to think that I wasn't, but I've learned to recognize the symptons (at least in myself). It's not that bad, and it doesn't make you worse than anyone else.

I have several reasons to think that what I'm experincing is not depression per say. First of all, I've taken anti-depression medication in the past and had no perciavable improvement in attitude from it. Second of all, it's not like I'm looking for a reason to end it all. The oposite actually. I've been living without a reason for too long, and it's starting to get to me. Not to mention those around me. Unless I find something to give my life a purpose, the walls are going to come crashing down around me very soon. On some level I don't want that to happen, but at the same time I can't think of any reason to actually motivate myself to do something about it.

But ok, even if I say I don't have depression, I do have a mental problem which I don't know how to deal with which is definately contributing to my situation. I have what you could call an addictive personallity. I'm not however addicted to anything in particular, I'm addicted to everything I enjoy doing at the same time. Any time I find something I like to do (a TV show I like, a game, listening to music), I will obsessively run it into the ground until I can no longer drive any pleasure. The problem is something that built up gradually, and it got to the point where I experince something like withdrawl any time I try to do something that requires work and presents no immediate reward. It's somewhat like being in your own private hell, where there is no escape from the choice of suffering or giving into temptation of a relief that will only increase the level of your suffering in the future. And because I am contantly being forced to do things which produce a pleasure reaction in my brain, it's dulled my ability to feel emotion, or anything else remotely positive to practically nothing. The only escape as I see it, is to give up doing anything that I enjoy at all. If I can manage that, at least I won't have to go through hell whenever I'm not doing those things. That's the only way I can ever hope to do anything with my life. I'm not sure if this actually is the result specific condition that can be treated, but I've never heard of anything like it outside of my own experince.

In order to convince me giving up everything I enjoy is worth doing, I have to be albe to see some point in doing things outside of what gives me any pleasure. I'm not even sure if I can afford to let myself feel a sense of accomplishment without falling into a trap. If I do that then I might start looking for shorter and shorter roads to that point, and end up right back where I am now. I know that in the past, any time I ever did something I felt proud of, it only made it harder to start something else.

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

For a singularitarian view on this stuff, see the FAQ about the Meaning of Life, by Eliezer Yudkowsky. Maybe you won't agree with everything he says (and maybe you'll disagree with most of what he says), but it'll give you some food for thought nonetheless.

I had a look at it, and actually it is refreshing to see there are some people who asked the same phllisophical questions and came up with most of the same anwsers as I did. I'm pretty sure no one I've met in real life agreed with my viewpoints that much. The main problem I have with it is the anwser to the question "Why should I get up in the morning?" I can agree that alturism is the most likely of the possible anwsers to be correct, but it still isn't enough by itself. As I said before, alturism just causes people to expect more in the furture, so it's effect is negative at the same time as being positive. Probably to the point where the two effects cancel each other out.

The universe is built on the priciple balance. The farther you push it in one direction, the harder it pushes back. If the goal is to break the balance, you can no sooner do that than break the laws of physics. If the goal is to shift the balance, you must accept that the reward of shifter the balance is equal to the price you pay to shift it. Isn't it better to just leave it be in the first place?

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

(And sorry if my post is confusing or badly written. As you know, english is not my first language, and this post is too big).

Not at all. Actually, you're english seems better to me than a few native speakers I know...

[Boltzmann]

Originally Posted by __Xzyx987X

Perhaps not, but just because something isn't arbitrary doesn't mean it has a significant meaning or purpose.

That's right, and it's true. Our utility functions have no significant meaning or purpose. In fact, most of them were selected for by natural selection, because they improved reproductive fitness in our ancestors.

From the PoV of the universe as a whole, our desires and goals are worthless and arbitrary. From our PoV they're not. Subjectivity is the name of the game here.

Originally Posted by __Xzyx987X

That is what I came to believe as well, but somehow it never comforted me. I wanted life to be something more than that. It's not easy for me to accept that the value of existance is limited to that which we give it.

I've been through this before (right after I became an atheist, that is). I'll try to put into words what I thought back then.

My first reaction upon realizing that there's no god, was just like yours: nihilism (and with basically the same arguments).

But then I tried a little thought experiment. Suppose that I'm wrong, and that there is a god which bestows meaning and purpose upon our lives. Now my dilemma would be settled: my life is meaningful because god makes it so. But this is no real solution, it only pushes the problem farther away. Because the deeper question is: who gives meaning to god? Either there's a meta-god out there who gives his existence meaning, or he derives meaning from himself (and the meta-god solution poses the same problem: who gives meaning to the meta-god?).

So, even if god exists and our lives have a purposed determined by him, this purpose is ultimately arbitrary: it only exists in the mind that generated it (in this thought experiment it would be god's mind).

Purposes and meanings are necessarily arbitrary, from a universal perspective. Subjectively (and even biologically) speaking they're anything but arbitrary.

Originally Posted by __Xzyx987X

It's just a matter of one meaningless thing giving meaning to another. By definition such a thing isn't possible. If one thing has no meaning, than any meaning it tries to give to something else shouldn't have meaning either.

Only if you think that meaning is an intrinsic property of the universe. Meaning is necessarily subjective, so only conscious minds can ascribe this property to anything at all. We create meaning, because nothing has intrinsic meaning. You need a mind to do that.

Originally Posted by __Xzyx987X

Let me ask you this; if the meaning lies in how we percieve the world, doesn't it then depend on the quality of the perciver?

I don't buy this part of your argument. Perhaps you could make it work if you assumed that an outside observer with arbitrarily high 'quality' is is setting the standards for "meaning". But there's no outside observer: only ourselves and our standards of meaning.

Originally Posted by __Xzyx987X

If the perciever is nothing but a walking biochemical victim of predeterminism, then what does that say for the value of the perception? To me it doesn't seem it could possibly be anything worthwhile. Even if my percetions tell me something has value, how can I believe it if I don't value my own perceptions?

But why don't you value your own perceptions? My point is that you should value them, since they're the only thing you have.

Originally Posted by __Xzyx987X

I'm not arguing that everything has equal value, I'm arguing that nothing has significant value. Even if there is something inside me that tells me certain things have better value that others, it makes no difference if I don't believe myself. Hmm... saying that makes the word "doublethink" come to mind. But that's still the way I feel about it.

But you can still see that some things have more value than others, right?

Originally Posted by __Xzyx987X

But ok, even if I say I don't have depression, I do have a mental problem which I don't know how to deal with which is definately contributing to my situation. I have what you could call an addictive personallity. I'm not however addicted to anything in particular, I'm addicted to everything I enjoy doing at the same time. Any time I find something I like to do (a TV show I like, a game, listening to music), I will obsessively run it into the ground until I can no longer drive any pleasure. The problem is something that built up gradually, and it got to the point where I experince something like withdrawl any time I try to do something that requires work and presents no immediate reward. It's somewhat like being in your own private hell, where there is no escape from the choice of suffering or giving into temptation of a relief that will only increase the level of your suffering in the future. And because I am contantly being forced to do things which produce a pleasure reaction in my brain, it's dulled my ability to feel emotion, or anything else remotely positive to practically nothing. The only escape as I see it, is to give up doing anything that I enjoy at all. If I can manage that, at least I won't have to go through hell whenever I'm not doing those things. That's the only way I can ever hope to do anything with my life. I'm not sure if this actually is the result specific condition that can be treated, but I've never heard of anything like it outside of my own experince.

I'm no psychiatrist, but I think that they might have some idea about your problem. Drug addiction is mostly about activating the pleasure centers of your brain (and the reward mechanisms), and a few neural pathways are used in the process. For some people in love, the same pathways are activated, meaning that love is a form of addiction too. Maybe in your case the pathways are being activated for any kind of stimulus. It's a wild guess here, but I think that it's worth checking with a professional.

[Boltzmann]

Sorry about the double post, but I think it's better to post here than to open a new thread about a subject that will raise few replies. I just want to give two links that are related to the thread's subject.

The first is an article in the current issue of Harvard Magazine about human irrationality and decision-making. It's called The Marketplace of Perceptions. I think it's relevant to the topic at hand, because it deals with how we make our decisions (and how to improve our chances of reaching the outcomes we value).

The second is about the Matrix and subjective experience (and it also illuminates the origin of our utility functions). It's called Was Cypher Right?: Why We Stay In Our Matrix. It's even more relavant to our discussion.

PS: Gaurav, if you're around, take a look at the first article, since it's quite good. You're already familiar with the contents of the second.

[Ryos]

Sorry, life is meaningless. Death, however, is also meaningless. Enjoy the fleeting moments of life and don't be so pessimistic. To quote ye olde Mel Gibson from Braveheart, "Every man dies, not every man really lives."

[Coolsvilleman]

For me not everything has to have meaning/purpose. Some things just are, and I enjoy that.

[__Xzyx987X]

Man, it's been a rough couple of days... I've been horribly sick since Wednesday morning. My temperature was above 104ºF on more than one occasion. I could barely manage to stand up for the most part. On top of that, my Grandma passed away last night, which really has my mom feeling depressed. I was never that close to Grandma personally, but it's still never easy when a member of your family passes on.

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

I've been through this before (right after I became an atheist, that is). I'll try to put into words what I thought back then.

My first reaction upon realizing that there's no god, was just like yours: nihilism (and with basically the same arguments).

But then I tried a little thought experiment. Suppose that I'm wrong, and that there is a god which bestows meaning and purpose upon our lives. Now my dilemma would be settled: my life is meaningful because god makes it so. But this is no real solution, it only pushes the problem farther away. Because the deeper question is: who gives meaning to god? Either there's a meta-god out there who gives his existence meaning, or he derives meaning from himself (and the meta-god solution poses the same problem: who gives meaning to the meta-god?).

So, even if god exists and our lives have a purposed determined by him, this purpose is ultimately arbitrary: it only exists in the mind that generated it (in this thought experiment it would be god's mind).

Purposes and meanings are necessarily arbitrary, from a universal perspective. Subjectively (and even biologically) speaking they're anything but arbitrary.

Yea, you're right. I guess that no matter how many levels of "higher purpose" you are working under, there always has to be something at the top. Whether we ourselves are the highest purpose, or whether it's some sort of all powerful super being really makes no difference.

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

I don't buy this part of your argument. Perhaps you could make it work if you assumed that an outside observer with arbitrarily high 'quality' is is setting the standards for "meaning". But there's no outside observer: only ourselves and our standards of meaning.

Point taken. I guess this is once again a matter of subjectiveness. There is no such thing as a objective judgement of quality. But still, one thing you have to give me. If something is worthless based on your own subjective values, than for all intent and purposes that thing is worthless to you.

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

But why don't you value your own perceptions? My point is that you should value them, since they're the only thing you have.

Perhaps, but if I do see them as worthless based on my values, how should I know I'm wrong if everythingis subjective? Actually, based on the nature of subjectivity, if I think that it's true than I must be right. I will however grant, that my percetion may be a bit skewed due to the fact my own mental state has prevented me from enjoying my life for quite some time now. I've gotten to the point where not only do I not see meaning in anything, I don't want to see meaning in anything. I makes things easier, since it gives me an excuse to just give up.

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

But you can still see that some things have more value than others, right?

Yes, at least they can when judged subjectively.

Originally Posted by Boltzmann

I'm no psychiatrist, but I think that they might have some idea about your problem. Drug addiction is mostly about activating the pleasure centers of your brain (and the reward mechanisms), and a few neural pathways are used in the process. For some people in love, the same pathways are activated, meaning that love is a form of addiction too. Maybe in your case the pathways are being activated for any kind of stimulus. It's a wild guess here, but I think that it's worth checking with a professional.

I've had myself checked by a professional before, although at the time I wasn't exactly clear on what was going on. I had thought it was derpression myself for a while. It seemed like an obvious anwser considering how I felt. That's how I ended up taking antidepression medication in the first place. As I said before, the medication had little, if any effect. It was only recently I equated the whole thing with the issue of addiction. Maybe now that I have a better idea what's going I should see if I can get any help with it. At any rate, I know I can't allow things to continue the way they are now, so I have to do something.

[Cid Highwind]

I wish you good luck and strength for these days. I hope you can be some support for your mom. I don't know about the meaning of life myself. But as I'm here, might as well make the best out of it, though that's not much of a philosophical answer.

(why oh why do I think of monty python immediately )

[Boltzmann]

Originally Posted by __Xzyx987X

Man, it's been a rough couple of days... I've been horribly sick since Wednesday morning. My temperature was above 104ºF on more than one occasion. I could barely manage to stand up for the most part. On top of that, my Grandma passed away last night, which really has my mom feeling depressed. I was never that close to Grandma personally, but it's still never easy when a member of your family passes on.

Sorry to hear that, man. I hope you get better ASAP.

Originally Posted by __Xzyx987X

But still, one thing you have to give me. If something is worthless based on your own subjective values, than for all intent and purposes that thing is worthless to you.

Perhaps, but if I do see them as worthless based on my values, how should I know I'm wrong if everythingis subjective? Actually, based on the nature of subjectivity, if I think that it's true than I must be right. I will however grant, that my percetion may be a bit skewed due to the fact my own mental state has prevented me from enjoying my life for quite some time now. I've gotten to the point where not only do I not see meaning in anything, I don't want to see meaning in anything. I makes things easier, since it gives me an excuse to just give up.

Even though I reject any kind of objective morality, I don't think that everything is relative. Especially when our subjective judgments leave the realm of the merely philophical or aesthetical (e.g. liking heavy metal, or gaming) and enters real-world decision making that affects other agents (human beings, in this case).

For instance, it's ok if you decide that cheese is worthless and that you won't eat it anymore. But it would be wrong if you decided that your neighbor is worthless so you should get rid of him.

That's why I like Jef Allbright's (from ExI-Chat) definition of morality:

"As discussed earlier, we can not know what is "good", but only that
what works to promote our values must be considered good. But even
that is from a limited subjective viewpoint. However, regardless of
these limits, we can agree that what works to promote our values *over
increasing scope*, within an inherently competitive environment, is
better."

So the real point is, what are your values? You must have some, or else you would be completely neutral toward everything. I don't think we even *really* know what our values are (or what they ought to be). Finding it out is part of our learning (and growth) process, as individuals and as a species. (For most of our history, mankind has been utterly blind about the origins of our passions and foibles, so we usually attributed them to god.)

Declaring most things to be "worthless" may be actually harmful to your values (and you certainly appear to have values, or else we wouldn't have this conversation at all).

[Tulac]

Life has no meaning, the more you question it's meaning the more depressed you get therefore don't question it's meaning...

[Grv]

I’m late, and Boltzmann might have made most of my potential input already redundant, but I'll try to squeeze through one humongous point anyway, hopefully not repeating anyone. Granted, I don’t know that mental condition of yours, __Xzyx987X, but giving things from my perspective is only the best I can do.






__Xzyx987X, you describe the problem at hand as no longer being able to find meaning in life. Truth is, life is only as vacuous as one appoints it to be. At your stage of vision on this particular subject, you’re probably not even remotely confident in or subject to other people's values, thus making theirs senseless to yours.

Then you describe you have reached the point where you think you'd like to commit suicide. I take this and the fact that you post this for others to read to mean that you've assumed a desperate position: one where you believe you'll remain without measures to solve your problem while solely dependent on your own resources.






The following obviously didn't occur to you, but before concluding life is not worth living, I would've said to myself: "Nuh-uh, back to the drawing board". I know of four ways I would have possibly handled your situation.

1) When there is no answer to give of my own or when I distrust my own judgement, I consider I could've been asking the wrong question(s). To confirm this, just question the question(s) and go from there.

When I believe an answer results in destructive thought not corresponding to the nature that has brought me to my situation prior to the would-be result (i.e. from some point onwards, life is suddenly not worth living, yet my autonomic processes have so far begged to differ), then 2) I'd challenge the answer by suggesting the opposite should be demonstrable, or 3) I'd notice the answer does not help achieve my objectives and should therefore be discarded (self-deception possibly ensuing), or 4) I'd consider how the answer can be used to achieve my still on-going objectives.

Obviously, 4 is the most preferable if the answer is correct, but most people seem oblivious to having this capacity, and like with 3, an objective (mostly some sort of need or desire) should already be present. 2 usually requires a feisty personality or being hopeless. Only 1 is applicable in any case by any one, so let me make an attempt to start you off with that one.




Why would you require meaning in the first place? Analysing the question: To mentally require something, a need or desire is implied, which derive from some sort of inherent mental capacity and some sort of influence (outside or inherent) prickling, playing the incentive. If you're fuelled by the desire to have meaning, you could consider that a) your desire is meaningless since it's only caused by genes and outside influences who were both without meaning as well, or b) you actually have an objective or challenge to meet.

The former argument (a) attempts to have you ignore your desire altogether. After all, you dislike the fact that there is no meaning to anything, but consequentially: there is no meaning to your point of view other than the value you have appointed to it, a value that is as meaningless according to your expressed thoughts. So essentially, the argument points out a vital contradiction (of relativist proportion ) in your point of view: Everything that makes up your life is meaningless, except your opinion of finding it meaningless? There is no indifference where I’d expect it, as you seem to value some things in life anyway.

The latter argument (b) attempts to give meaning to your activities. Challenging the thought that there is no meaning while you desire one, could only strengthen you, since you work on satisfying one of your hungers without putting yourself to harm. Basically, this argument tells you to create meaning by appointing values (which you’ve shown you can) a little differently. (which if I’m not mistaken, is where Boltzmann is trying to steer you to with his latest post)

One could argue that any of this doesn’t change anything about your previous arguments on things eventually going to waste anyway. This is true, but also completely irrelevant to the arguments: they attempt to pick apart and elevate your futile search for meaning to something more productive, since you obviously require so (“bothering” other people with your worries is a cry for help, one way or another).

I implore you to consider both arguments heavily. If you don’t buy either argument, we might as well try to analyse the most oftenly concluded answers, rather than analysing the question.




So why would you require meaning in the first place?
-
- To make you feel good about yourself?
-
Unless you were exceptionally brilliant at infantile age, you definitely did not require meaning when you were playing about at that age, perceiving the world solely as a tool for your enjoyment while soaking up new information. That is, if you were what is considered a healthy little playful child. One could argue that with all the neurological development and experiences you've had since, you've acquired different tastes (or needs) of enjoyment. But that doesn’t mean any of our indulgence, which was so apparent when being infantile, has ever left the building, however subtly its influences might prance around one's awareness later in life. Considering that your desire for meaning seems hefty enough to seemingly ‘take away’ your zest for life, I’d say this desire’s priority takes away from your indulgencies, which could all serve the same purpose of making you feel good about yourself. Question your priorities.
-
- To have the feeling you’re working to something?
-
Understandable, since having an objective gives reason to one’s activities. I’m among those who continuously appoint new objectives in quite an autonomous way. If one believed to work to an objective (s)he him/herself did not appoint to oneself (i.e. the meaning of life) only to find out there was no meaning, then the realisation should also be able to point out that it was (s)he him/herself who appointed the objective to oneself: only his/her inner workings were responsible. I say that realising one did it before, one should be able do it again with another objective.






I have an opinion for myself on these matters, but it might strike a chord the “wrong” way. All the better I suppose, for it’s obviously fire that one needs to be zestful.

The way I see it, searching for some meaning serves me no purpose. I don't need some 'higher meaning' to entertain myself, as I’m too busy satisfying other hungers. :sex: It serves me just fine, knowing that I am free of ridiculously restrictive expectations, or some code of life presented by another. Sure, my sig may be saying Bushido, but I only have it there for few of its rules being perfect descriptions of how I felt I should act long before being familiar to them. Truth is, I have principles fuelled only by my moral senses, which any self-aware git knows only matter until they threaten you. Oh,