A pointless post

[WillLem]

This is a pointless post














































Or is it?

[Strato Incendus]

I would assume the existence of this post precedes its essence...

[WillLem]

I would assume the existence of this post precedes its essence...

Please elaborate. I am not entirely sure what you mean

[Strato Incendus]

The post existed first, and now you need to find a purpose (essence) for it.

(I'm actually not an existentialist, I think it's incorrect with regards to biological organisms, since those keep designing their offspring for the innate purpose of procreation. But existentialism is probably indeed correct with regards to the universe itself, i.e. for all its non-living contents.)

[WillLem]

Does existence have to necessarily have a purpose or meaning, or can things just exist?

If things can just exist, why is finding a purpose or meaning interesting, relevant or important?

Existentialism often seems to be concerned with the gap between knowing that something exists, and knowing why is exists. Asking whether the gap even needs to be crossed also appears to be a relevant question.

There is also a certain amount of anxiety or mental distress associated with existential thinking; I'd suggest that this is due to the lack of fundamental, tangible answers to a lot of the questions it poses.

[Strato Incendus]

Does existence have to necessarily have a purpose or meaning, or can things just exist?

No, it does not need a meaning - outside of beings that experience need. The universe may not have a meaning, but the majority of the universe is uninhabitable, so there's nobody there in need of any meaning, and thus also nobody there to lament its absence.

Biological organisms have an innate purpose that they were designed for - much like the commonly cited example of how a chair has been designed with the purpose in mind that somebody should sit on it (its essence precedes its existence). In case of biological organisms, that's procreation, because that's the criterion we select each other for, i.e. for which we design each next generation.

It's just that for a lot of humans, that purpose alone isn't enough if you spell it out bluntly like that. So that's why a lot of humans search for another meaning beyond the mere passing-on of their genes (even though that's still the meaning most people choose to spend the majority of their time to act it out).

Even then, absence of meaning isn't a problem in my book as long as there is absence of suffering. People can live a perfectly "happy but pointless" life in hedonism, for example (or rather, the only "point" is having fun). The problem occurs when there's absence of meaning in the presence of suffering, because finding a meaning in the suffering somebody experiences is a common way of coping with it.

[WillLem]

No, it does not need a meaning - outside of beings that experience need

This is a fascinating concept. There are various directions you can take this in: of course, there is "need" on a conscious level, which is essentially what you've discussed, but then it could be argued that everything which exists also exists with need of certain conditions. For example, the chair needs materials, design, constructiona and maintainence. It also needs an atmosphere suitable to house it, and it needs to not be set on fire. Stuff like that. And, more universally, planets need gravity, a star to orbit, etc.

Biological organisms have an innate purpose that they were designed for ... that's procreation

Now there's an ideology I can happily buy into!

People can live a perfectly "happy but pointless" life in hedonism, for example (or rather, the only "point" is having fun)

I try to live a hedonistic lifestyle as often as possible. Sometimes money, circumstances and the general sufferings of everyday life get in the way, but whenever I can I go after having as much fun as is humanly possible. When it comes down to it, that's all there is for most of us.

I tend to think of myself as a generous hedonist though - it's not enough for just me to be having fun, I like to know that others around me are also having fun. I love working the room when there's a party, for example - I'll move around regularly and talk to everyone, tell jokes, top up people's drinks, get people dancing and make sure their song comes on; I have to know most of the people there (or have had a few drinks!) to feel comfortable doing that, but when it all comes together I'm in my element

[Strato Incendus]

This is a fascinating concept. There are various directions you can take this in: of course, there is "need" on a conscious level, which is essentially what you've discussed, but then it could be argued that everything which exists also exists with need of certain conditions. For example, the chair needs materials, design, constructiona and maintainence. It also needs an atmosphere suitable to house it, and it needs to not be set on fire. Stuff like that. And, more universally, planets need gravity, a star to orbit, etc.

Sure, this depends on how you define "need". I tend to use it synonymously with "desire", which is "something that results in suffering if it is not fulfilled (and tends to result in brief pleasure when it is being fulfilled)". The chair requires certain materials to exist, but it doesn't feel / perceive any need of those things - if they are not present, the chair itself doesn't exist in the first place. Same for stars and planets - they couldn't care less if they are destroyed by other cosmic events. Likewise, certain requirements need to be met in order for a star system to form, but there is nothing there to suffer if those requirements are not fulfilled and something else happens instead. With biological needs, however, there's much more at stake if they are not being fulfilled.

[607]

Well, the topic as a whole certainly didn't stay pointless for long.