Sum up the meaning of life in one sentence.

Page 12 of 25 [ 390 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 ... 25 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

b9
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Aug 2008
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,003
Location: australia

30 Dec 2009, 11:03 am

SporadSpontan wrote:

b9 wrote:

Quote:

Sum up the meaning of life in one sentence.

i expect to have to inhale 840,960,000 times, and exhale the same amount of times

So you're saying that - give or take some breaths - your life has about the same potential as any other species of animal?

well how many things you can do with each breath may be a consideration.

galapagos turtles often live for 150 years, but i do not know how fast they breathe or how fast their heart's beat.

i wonder whether most animal's heart's beat a similar amount of times in their lifespan, and if their longevity is related to how rapidly their heart beats.

it is not a sufficiently interesting idea for me to pursue just at the moment anyway so whatever.

to answer you more directly, i seldom get caught up in philosophical discussion, and i prefer to just post whatever comes to my mind based only on the topic title, and that is not often influenced by posts within the thread i reply in.

b9
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Aug 2008
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,003
Location: australia

30 Dec 2009, 11:07 am

with a small amount of consideration as to the "heart beat quota" quandary, i see that it is a dead end because if a dog lives 7 times faster than we do, it's pulse would be 490 which is not the case.
sorry i just had to say that before i was gobbled by a vulture

NarcissusSavage
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 675

30 Dec 2009, 1:52 pm

I'll do you one better, I'll sum it up in a single word.

Propagate

_________________
I am Ignostic.
Go ahead and define god, with universal acceptance of said definition.
I'll wait.

Magnus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,372
Location: Claremont, California

30 Dec 2009, 2:16 pm

Propagation is an instinctive drive which motivates humans to create. If you find meaning in creation, then that is a perfect answer. Any creative act gives my life more meaning. We can create love. Any act performed with love is very meaningful.

_________________
As long as man continues to be the ruthless destroyer of lower living beings he will never know health or peace. For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other.

-Pythagoras

DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

30 Dec 2009, 3:22 pm

As a woman I can say with 100% factual certainty that (1) I do not pee through my vagina and (2) I am quite normal in this. The fact that this "3rd" hole is too tiny to notice does not change the fact that it exists. Also, I do not care if this information would officially be "basic," "intermediate," or "advanced" biology.

As a moderator I'll say I think we've had enough of that tangential and inappropriate discussion, and will remind people to keep personal insults out of their posts.

Just FYI, I edited out the off topic sheep jokes pages back.

_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).

Last edited by DW_a_mom on 30 Dec 2009, 4:07 pm, edited 2 times in total.

DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

30 Dec 2009, 3:41 pm

Sand wrote:

All that idiocy of gods, worshiping ancestors, or any kind of mental fluff of divine beings fits very nicely within my total dismissal. It's all naive insanity.

You need to stop speaking this way about faith and those with faith. You are directly insulting a large percentage of the population and that violates WP TOS. You may say that you feel its all idiocy, but you may not state it as a fact, as you consistently have done.

_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).

DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

30 Dec 2009, 4:02 pm

Before I saw all the strange off-topic discussion, I was actually intrigued by the OP's question. My answer:

"Embrace the journey."

_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

30 Dec 2009, 6:53 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:

Sand wrote:

All that idiocy of gods, worshiping ancestors, or any kind of mental fluff of divine beings fits very nicely within my total dismissal. It's all naive insanity.

I am not insulting anybody. I am merely stating my conviction that belief with no evidence is not sane and I prefer that people act logically and with reference to reality. If a lot of people are upset by my convictions I would say I have just as much right to them as anybody else and that they are upset it merely indicates their own insecurity in their belief. Please don't lecture me as to whether I have a right to clearly state my beliefs. If I am not permitted to do so I will withdraw from the site. The percentage of people who have what I consider illogical convictions has absolutely nothing to do with their validity.

TheOddGoat
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 516

30 Dec 2009, 7:58 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:

Sand wrote:

All that idiocy of gods, worshiping ancestors, or any kind of mental fluff of divine beings fits very nicely within my total dismissal. It's all naive insanity.

You can state as fact that having faith faith = gullibility though.

Faith
-noun
Belief that is not based on proof: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.

gullible
–adjective
easily deceived or cheated.

It is easy to deceive people who believe things without proof and therefore people with faith are gullible.

If they are not gullible, then they have double standards because they should believe everything without evidence if they believe one thing.

Faith isn't idiocy but is absolutely required for it. You can't be an idiot if you only believe things that are proven.

Also, I would expect you to moderate any posts that contain any proclamation of faith in abrahamic religion because I and most people find the promotion of genocide to be hugely offensive and is a part of the bible's old testament which is an integral part of all of those faiths.

I believe talking about such offensive things as wanting slaves, offering up your daughter for rape etc are ot allowed here and by mentioning abrahamic faith you are promoting all of these things because they are part of it.

If you say you have abrahamic faith you are saying genocide and rape are potentially forces for good.

If you do not do this you are being religiously discriminatory because the bible specifically says that all who believe there is no god are fools.

You are saying you can't say belief in things without proof is idiotic but you CAN say atheism is idiotic, particularly if you believe in things because they are proven.

It is pretty crooked to let theists openly say that they believe atheists are fools by saying they are christians but if an atheist says the same but without a guise it is moderated.

I hope you aren't a christian or have never said you were a christian on this board, because then your moderation would be hugely hypocritical and would show that you really do have faith that atheists are fools and shouldn't be allowed to say that believing things without evidence is idiocy.

If you don't believe atheists are fools then you can't really be a christian.

Oh wow, actually you have called me a fool several times, looking at your posts you frequently say that you have faith that this is absolute truth:

Psalm 14:1-3 The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none that does good. The LORD looks down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there are any that act wisely, that seek after God. They have all gone astray, they are all alike corrupt; there is none that does good, no, not one.

You call me corrupt.

You call me a fool.

You call me one who has gone astray and can do no good.

Every single time you say you have faith in christianity, you are saying all this and more.

Idiocy? Of course not: I am a corrupt fool who has gone astray and can do no good...

Or that's just the official standpoint of WP?

When I say I believe things when they are proven I am saying so without any extra subtext, when you say you have faith in christianity you are also putting forward the entire contents of the bible and all official texts related to christianity because it is a very specific doctrine.

When you say sand can't say belief in gods is idiocy you are saying he is below you and any other people who exclaim that they have faith in an abrahamic religion because you are saying the SAME THING to sand by doing so.

Bias and hypocrisy much?

Last edited by TheOddGoat on 30 Dec 2009, 8:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

30 Dec 2009, 8:17 pm

a) Calling anyone's beliefs naive insanity is the same as calling those who hold those beliefs naive and insane. That is unacceptable. The fact that most members here are agnostic or atheist does not mean they should forever remain without warning about what is, truly, a hostile attitude. I don't see it as a threat, but others might, and Wrong Planet is a site for those with AS, not just those with AS who happen to think faith is bunk.

b) You cannot attribute to my personal feelings a passage that I did not write and have not quoted. You cannot assume that I agree with or believe in that passage based on any statements about faith or faith family membership I have made. Your construction about Abrahamic history goes way, way too far. Those passages are maybe a history and most likely a story form telling of history, no more. There is nothing that says "do this today" or "this is how you should live." Am I a slave trader because I have Dutch ancestors and the Dutch used to have many slave traders? Of course not. What you are saying is the same thing.

c) You assume that faith is completely baseless yet, for those who hold it, that is not true. The fact that it is rooted in something you have not experienced and / or have chosen to reject does not mean that there is no basis of any sort for it. I don't expect you to buy into it, but I do expect you to stop calling the fact that I do naive, baseless and gullible. That is no different than deriding a person's tastes in clothes, or in pets, or hobbies. All these personal choices are a part of how a person sees themselves and, while you do not have to agree, you DO have respect it, or at least hold your tongue on the disrespect.

Yes, I rarely come here and the moderators mostly leave you all alone to use negative terminology about faith. And I'm not saying you cannot continue to do so. I am only asking that you follow the simple rule of phrasing is as your personal opinion, and not using language that implies the certainty of fact.

I knew I'd get an argument but the request remains, and I believe it is a fair one.

_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

30 Dec 2009, 8:21 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:

a) Calling anyone's beliefs naive insanity is the same as calling those who hold those beliefs naive and insane. That is unacceptable. The fact that most members here are agnostic or aeithiest does not mean they should forever remain without warning about what is, truly, a hostile attitude. I don't see it as a threat, but others might, and Wrong Planet is a site for those with AS, not just those with AS who happen to think faith is bunk.

b) You cannot attribute to my personal feelings a passage that I did not write and have not quoted. You cannot assume that I agree with or believe in that passage based on any statements about faith or faith family membership I have made. Your construction about Abrahamic history goes way, way too far. Those passages are maybe a history and most likely a story form telling of history, no more. There is nothing that says "do this today" or "this is how you should live." Am I a slave trader because I have Dutch ancestors and the Dutch used to have many slave traders? Of course not. What you are saying is the same thing.

c) You assume that faith is completely baseless yet, for those who hold it, that is not true. The fact that it is rooted in something you have not experienced and / or have chosen to reject does not mean that there is no basis of any sort for it. I don't expect you to buy into it, but I do expect you to stop calling the fact that I do naive, baseless and gullible. That is no different than deriding a person's tastes in clothes, or in pets, or hobbies. All these personal choices are a part of how a person sees themselves and, while you do not have to agree, you DO have respect it, or at least hold your tongue on the disrespect.

Yes, I rarely come here and the moderators mostly leave you all alone to use negative terminology about faith. And I'm not saying you cannot continue to do so. I am only asking that you follow the simple rule of phrasing is as your personal opinion, and not using language that implies the certainty of fact.

I knew I'd get an argument but the request remains, and I believe it is a fair one.

It seems the basis of the discussion revolves around the definitions of idiocy and insanity.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

30 Dec 2009, 8:25 pm

TheOddGoat wrote:

You can state as fact that having faith faith = gullibility though.

Faith
-noun
Belief that is not based on proof: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.

Noah Webster in 1828 wrote:

Faith
-noun
[L. fides, fido, to trust; Gr. to persuade, to draw towards any thing, to conciliate; to believe, to obey. In the Greek Lexicon of Hederic it is said, the primitive signification of the verb is to bind and draw or lead, as signifies a rope or cable. But this remark is a little incorrect. The sense of the verb, from which that of rope and binding is derived, is to strain, to draw, and thus to bind or make fast. A rope or cable is that which makes fast. Heb.]

1. Belief; the assent of the mind to the truth of what is declared by another, resting on his authority and veracity, without other evidence; the judgment that what another states or testifies is the truth. I have strong faith or no faith in the testimony of a witness, or in what a historian narrates.

2. The assent of the mind to the truth of a proposition advanced by another; belief, or probable evidence of any kind.

3. In theology, the assent of the mind or understanding to the truth of what God has revealed. Simple belief of the scriptures, of the being and perfections of God, and of the existence, character and doctrines of Christ, founded on the testimony of the sacred writers, is called historical or speculative faith; a faith little distinguished from the belief of the existence and achievements of Alexander or of Cesar.

4. Evangelical, justifying, or saving faith, is the assent of the mind to the truth of divine revelation, on the authority of God's testimony, accompanied with a cordial assent of the will or approbation of the heart; an entire confidence or trust in God's character and declarations, and in the character and doctrines of Christ, with an unreserved surrender of the will to his guidance, and dependence on his merits for salvation. In other words, that firm belief of God's testimony, and of the truth of the gospel, which influences the will, and leads to an entire reliance on Christ for salvation.

Being justified by faith. Rom 5.

Without faith it is impossible to please God. Heb 11.

For we walk by faith, and not by sight. 2 Cor 5.

With the heart man believeth to righteousness. Rom 10.

The faith of the gospel is that emotion of the mind, which is called trust or confidence, exercised towards the moral character of God, and particularly of the Savior.

Faith is an affectionate practical confidence in the testimony of God.

Faith is a firm, cordial belief in the veracity of God, in all the declarations of his word; or a full and affectionate confidence in the certainty of those things which God has declared, and because he has declared them.

5. The object of belief; a doctrine or system of doctrines believed; a system of revealed truths received by christians.

They heard only, that he who persecuted us in times past, now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed. Gal 1.

6. The promises of God, or his truth and faithfulness.

shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? Rom 3.

7. An open profession of gospel truth.

Your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world. Rom 1.

8. A persuasion or belief of the lawfulness of things indifferent.

Hast thou faith? Have it to thyself before God. Rom 14.

9. Faithfulness; fidelity; a strict adherence to duty and fulfillment of promises.

Her failing, while her faith to me remains, I would conceal.

Children in whom is no faith. Deu 32.

10. Word or honor pledged; promise given; fidelity. He violated his plighted faith.

For you alone I broke my faith with injured Palamon.

11. Sincerity; honesty; veracity; faithfulness. We ought in good faith, to fulfill all our engagements.

12. Credibility or truth.

The faith of the foregoing narrative.

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

30 Dec 2009, 8:30 pm

Theology is never any help; it is searching in a dark cellar at midnight for a black cat that isn't there. Theologians can persuade themselves of anything.
Robert A. Heinlein

TheOddGoat
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 516

30 Dec 2009, 8:31 pm

"b) You cannot attribute to my personal feelings a passage that I did not write and have not quoted. "

That is a lie, in another thread you said you thought the bible was inspired by god, god is perfect and therefore his influence is perfect.

"You assume that faith is completely baseless"

Look at the dictionary definition of faith. Please.

If it has a basis, it is no longer faith.

"stop calling the fact that I do naive, baseless and gullible."

Again, look in the dictionary.

If you are worried about it being gullibility or naivety then you must not have it.

Real people of faith take pride in being seen as gullible or naive.

"That is no different than deriding a person's tastes in clothes, or in pets, or hobbies."

Reality is a matter of taste?

You have ignored what I said.

Whether you believe it or not, you are presenting that passage to me every time you say you are a christian.

What if I said I had faith in a religion that was based on a book that just said christians are scum, offensive, isn't it?

But oh... I didn't believe in THAT bit.

And I shouldn't have to explain beforehand that I don't believe that bit.

"Calling anyone's beliefs naive insanity is the same as calling those who hold those beliefs naive and insane."

Beliefs with facts are beliefs, beliefs without evidence are faiths. I didn't say anything about beliefs.

Faith is naive, belief is not.

Is it not naive to believe something without evidence?

Did you know that if you say banana slowly it sounds like "Gullible"?

I didn't say anything about your personal feelings either.... I said what you presented me with.

If I you hold up a piece of paper that says I hate you, atheist scum - that is OK as long as someone else wrote it and you say you don't agree?

Last edited by TheOddGoat on 30 Dec 2009, 8:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

TheOddGoat
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 516

30 Dec 2009, 8:34 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

TheOddGoat wrote:

You can state as fact that having faith faith = gullibility though.

Faith
-noun
Belief that is not based on proof: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.

Noah Webster in 1828 wrote:

Way to use a different dictionary to me....

Still , the first definition basically says what I said ;-)

So I guess you are supporting me but it looks like you are trying to say my dictionary is wrong.

Here's another thing:

Arthur C. Clarke
"Religion is the most malevolent of all mind viruses."

If I said I like all Arthur C. Clarke quotes and thought that although he wrote them they were influenced by perfection and you knew this was something he said, would this not be an offense to you? Because what I just said is what you said about the bible. ALthough I may not agree with it, it is perfection.

A bit of a cop-out really.

Extreme passive aggression?

Also, I demand that you respect my faith that eating wood will make me live forever. And accept that the wood eaters book is perfect and says "all non-wood eaters are fools."

But don't worry, I have faith in this but it isn't my view.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

30 Dec 2009, 11:48 pm

TheOddGoat wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

TheOddGoat wrote:

You can state as fact that having faith faith = gullibility though.

Faith
-noun
Belief that is not based on proof: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.

Noah Webster in 1828 wrote:

1. Belief; the assent of the mind to the truth of what is declared by another, resting on his authority and veracity, without other evidence; the judgment that what another states or testifies is the truth. I have strong faith or no faith in the testimony of a witness, or in what a historian narrates.

Way to use a different dictionary to me....

[imghttp://www.downloads.tripura4u.com/essential-softwares/dic.jpg[/img]

Still , the first definition basically says what I said -)

Not quite. Faith is basically taking someone at their word, such as an authority like Euclid saying "vertical angles are equal". While there is proof of it, you do not need to see it if you can trust the source. Certainly you can attack the character of the source or make all sorts of arguments to disregard. However, it is not accepting with no proof, but on the basis of trust of a source.

Perhaps the first definition you quoted is correct as well, just not in the sense you would like it to be.

Page 12 of 25 [ 390 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 ... 25 Next

Jump to:

Sum up the meaning of life in one sentence. Post Reply New Topic

Sum up the meaning of life in one sentence.