The typically accepted definition of the word "delusion" has to do with a belief that persists regardless of evidence to the contrary.Mozart handles this by simply claiming that it is a scientific fact that there is no meaning to life... Perhaps he can point to actual scientific studies that have studied the specific question as to whether there is meaning to life. Perhaps he can provide quotes from established scientists who support his claim that science has determined that everything we do is meaningless. Perhaps he can coherently explain that much of what he claims is not, itself, nonsensical. However, I am not waiting with bated breath.
Words actually don't have definite meaning...Words are a product of a special kind of behavior that humans are capable of. Yes they have neurological correlates, as do all behavior, but those neurological correlates develop precisely as they do, because words are functional because of their social outcomes. e.g., we learn to say "water", as a way that sometimes results in our acquiring water from another person. We also learn to say "water", in a way that results in social approval from others who appreciate that we can label water. We also learn to say "water" because using the word in other ways also, sometimes, provides some sort of gain for us. How is this meaningless? You say that pleasure is meaningful. Using words increases our prospects for experiencing pleasure. Using words increases our prospects for survival. So how can one say that words have no definable meaning? That seems to me to be nonsensical. Nonverbal behaviors, e.g., walking, also have neurological correlates. Would you argue that walking is meaningless? First off, some words are created based off our evolutionary design. For example, since it is in our evolutionary design to desire things in life and be motivated towards those things, we would then come up with the English word "good" to describe that since the meaning of the word "good" is "that which is desired." But as I said before, our evolutionary design does not tell us how we should think and is meaningless as well. Therefore, words are also meaningless and we can interpret them anyway we want to. But our interpretations would not be true at all in a meaningless universe. Another example is that the word "water" has been created based on something that is an objective scientific fact (which would be the accumulation of H20 molecules). Only the scientific fact of water in terms of H20 molecules alone by itself without any words to describe it is an objective scientific fact. As for the word "water" and why it appears to have objective meaning since we are able to communicate it to everyone who speaks English, when we are children, we learn from our parents the meaning of the word "water" from their point of view through associating observable scientific facts in life with words through their teachings to us. But for all we know, our parents could of actually given us different associations. Which would mean that the word "water" could actually mean something else such as what we would refer to as the sun. But as for the reason why our parents don't give us such different associations as the ones I've just described, this would be because they are all in obedience to a main authority figure (which would be the people who have invented words and their meanings from their own point of view). Second, nonverbal behaviors such as walking are also meaningless because, for all we know, we could choose to yell instead of walk, crawl instead of walk, etc. because, again, even though us choosing to walk is in our evolutionary design, our evolutionary design does not tell us how we should think or what actions we should do since this is a meaningless universe that does not tell us how we should think and what actions we should do. Of course, doing things such as yelling instead of walking makes no sense, it is also in our evolutionary design to make sense of things which, again, since this is a meaningless universe, this does not tell us that we should also make sense of things either.
EEEEEEEE-aaaaa BABA gaa-goo lala
EEEEEEEE-aaaaa BABA gaa-goo lalaYa this guy reminds me of that socratus guy posting goofy physics ideas. Not to denigrate the intelligent posters we have here, but this forum IS a general forum, not a place for hard-core academic discussion (which is not to say there aren't some folks here qualified to have that level of discussion). I think this Mozart guy and socratus (boy I hate that name, Socrates would be rolling in his grave) are just afraid to post their ideas in hard-core philosophy and physics forums where they'd be taken apart or flat out ignored.
Mozart, Have you considered citing your own posts in this thread as objective evidence that (at least some combinations of) words are meaningless?
OTOH, if words are so meaningless, how come you emit so many of them?
Our evolutionary design underlies EVERYTHING we do (including everything we say, think, conceive, etc.) So? It does not follow, that since our we are designed by evolutionary processes, that, therefore, everything we do is meaningless.
Our verbal behavior is a special kind of behavior, in that, by definition, it requires a listener. IOW it is a socially developed behavior. If we humans were not social creatures, we would not have the ability to use words or to formulate concepts such as “meaning”.
Mozart, I occasionally, think that I understand glimpses of meaning in some of the things that you say, even while you continue to espouse that words have no meaning.
Now you are also espousing that EVERYTHING we do, and, indeed our entire universe is meaningless. Therefore, I presume that you include relationships with others as being meaningless. From this perspective, your postings, and the responses that you get, must also be meaningless.
And yet you are (I am guessing, from your perspective) “trapped” by this deterministic universe, emitting postings, despite their meaninglessness.
So in this sense, you are correct: Our perceptions of our selves (as separate from our universe) as autonomous individuals, having thoughts, assigning meanings, making sense of what we perceive, is illusory. We are completely and integrally a part of the function of our universe.
In another sense, you are completely incorrect: We are equipped by our universe to experience ourselves as operating within our universe. We have the capacity to assign and understand and experience “meaning”.
That you experience everything as meaningless, is unfortunate.
Our evolutionary design underlies EVERYTHING we do (including everything we say, think, conceive, etc.) So? It does not follow, that since our we are designed by evolutionary processes, that, therefore, everything we do is meaningless. Our verbal behavior is a special kind of behavior, in that, by definition, it requires a listener. IOW it is a socially developed behavior. If we humans were not social creatures, we would not have the ability to use words or to formulate concepts such as "meaning". Mozart, I occasionally, think that I understand glimpses of meaning in some of the things that you say, even while you continue to espouse that words have no meaning. Now you are also espousing that EVERYTHING we do, and, indeed our entire universe is meaningless. Therefore, I presume that you include relationships with others as being meaningless. From this perspective, your postings, and the responses that you get, must also be meaningless. And yet you are (I am guessing, from your perspective) "trapped" by this deterministic universe, emitting postings, despite their meaninglessness. So in this sense, you are correct: Our perceptions of our selves (as separate from our universe) as autonomous individuals, having thoughts, assigning meanings, making sense of what we perceive, is illusory. We are completely and integrally a part of the function of our universe. In another sense, you are completely incorrect: We are equipped by our universe to experience ourselves as operating within our universe. We have the capacity to assign and understand and experience "meaning". That you experience everything as meaningless, is unfortunate.First off, I said before that any personal created meanings in life are delusional since life has no meaning. I would actually have to correct myself on that now that I have thought about it. This would just include meanings that do not go against science. So since it is a scientific fact that any personal meanings we create are no different than the combined functioning of the atoms and particles in our brains that create these meanings, then to actually say that our personal created meanings have no meaning, this would mean that we don't have any functioning atoms and molecules in our brains which would be false here. However, this would only include meanings besides "good" and "bad" since, as I'm going to explain below, good and bad are scientific properties. This would also include meanings besides being in your own mind and the pleasure of others not being anything good from your perspective since you cannot experience their pleasure and that it would all just be neutral thoughts from your perspective that judges the pleasure of others being either good or bad. Now I said that the word "good" means "that which is desired." But there could also be other definitions of the word good out there. So one might say that our pleasure is not what we would call a "good" sensation, but instead a "pleasant" sensation and, therefore, we can still be good people in other ways besides pleasure. However, these other definitions are delusional because good can only mean one thing in terms of evolution which would be our encouragement (pleasure) to survive and benefit our survival. Again, pleasure really is something that encourages our survival in life, but can be misused in not benefiting ours and the survival of others and can be used in harming ourselves and others. And as I said before earlier in my writing, you can still harm others and you would still be a good person as long as you have pleasure. However, I would never harm others because it is in my wiring of my brain and evolutionary design to be caring and compassionate towards others even despite my personal beliefs here. Nor would I ever consider such a thing anyway. The reason why the only thing good is pleasure is because if we had no emotions or any pleasant or unpleasant sensations to any degree whatsoever, then all thoughts would be the same in the sense that they wouldn't encourage us to do anything in life. You would still get up and do things anyway in life, but it would not be encouragement, "looking forward" to things in life, or viewing anything as "good" at all. If we have just thoughts alone of things being good in life, being encouraged, and looking forward to things in life, these thoughts are just mere neutral images, words, sounds, etc. that only trick us into believing so. If we had no emotions or any unpleasant sensations such as pain whatsoever, then I ask you how a thought (message) in the brain of your life being good is any different than a thought that your life is bad other than them simply being different words, sounds, images, etc? Sure, one type of thought might send messages to other parts of our brain that enable us to perform actions such as walking, talking, etc. while another makes us perform different actions or doesn't make us do anything at all. But all these other parts of our brain responsible for other things besides emotions and unpleasant sensations, they cannot be defined as anything good or bad or be defined by any other personal meanings we create either since, again, the combined atoms and particles that define our personal created meanings in our brains cannot define the combined atoms and particles of these other parts of our brain since they are different. And they wouldn't be anything good or bad on their own anyway. Now you might be thinking that "Ok, so my life is nothing good without my pleasure. But at least my life is still worthwhile." But even this word "worthwhile" is based on perceiving things as good in life, looking forward to living your life, being encouraged in life, etc. As I said before, pleasure is the only thing that is good in life. Therefore, good is a scientific property (which would be the atoms and particles that give us pleasure). Same thing for bad. So you would be delusional to think that your life is good or bad or that you are a good or bad person without feelings of pleasure or pain since good and bad are actual scientific properties and your personal created meanings in life (your thoughts) can never be these scientific properties. As I said before, "good" is a scientific property (which would be the pleasure itself) while all our thoughts remain a different scientific property. Finally, I should say that the emergent property (pleasure) is the result of all the combined atoms and particles in our brains that are responsible for it. But it does not exist as anything else in this universe besides the combined functioning of those atoms and particles (such as some supernatural entity that cannot be defined by the functioning of atoms and particles).
That was actually an improvement Mozart. One thing followed from the other. Still, your basic premises are wrong, but you’re putting together these ideas a little better than before. Since you rejected the suggested readings, how about an hour of listening. Actually you can skip the first 20 minutes and skip to the guy who asks about how do you determine right and wrong. He uses the word “moral" which I realize you don’t, but the logic that Matt and Don present is basically the same as what we’ve been trying to say.
Go here and chose show #891]
You should listen to the whole thing because it is what would happen if you were talking to someone who was familiar with these ideas, instead of writing long posts and then ignoring the feedback. It goes something like this:
You say it’s scientifically true that life has no meaning, Matt starts with descriptive laws of the universe that are determined by observation. No emotion or meaning is needed
to come up with those.
You say atoms that define meaning or pleasure can’t define other atoms, those are neutral. That ignores the laws of the universe and ignores properties of the human mind.
You ask, “if we had no emotions", but of course we do, that’s part of those atoms doing things in a universe where things interact and move around. As Matt points out, the universe is not static. It is active, and we have evolved to observe it and compare some of those actions to others. That’s how we come up with “right and wrong", “pleasure and pain" and “meaning".
When people say they are looking for meaning in their life or in the universe, what they are actually seeking is a supernatural explanation, a god or godlike figure, who is going to explain everything, make sense and make everything all right. They aren’t really looking for meaning, they are looking for fulfillment of their fantasies. They’re off to see the Wizard.
Mozart, Your posts and responses are still too long and tedious for me to wade thru completely to divine what you are trying to say. But having started reading your last response, before I gave up, it occurred to me to suggest that you consider using the word “illusional” rather than “delusional”. I am not sure, but it may make your some of your statements make better sense.
OTOH, if words are so meaningless, how come you emit so many of them?Excellent question! Lois :lol: