What is the point of life?

[Mulder]

To a religious person there is an obvious point to life. What about to an atheist, as I assume many skeptics are. If we are a bundle of molecules wandering over an uncaring world for a few years, what is the point?

[Mulder]

Incidentally, before someone makes the very obvious point, 'why SHOULD there be any point to life?', I'd like to clarify what I mean. I'm not looking for a grand philosophical point covering all life. Rather, I'm wondering what gives ordinary individual human lives any point?

[Matt]

The meaning of life is to give meaning to life.

[Mulder]

Thanks, but that sounds like something from a self-help manual.

[Cuddles]

What is the point of blue?

It makes just as much sense as a question.

There is no point. It just is.

[Matt]

It may sound like something out of a self help book but to me it's the distilled truth of Existentialism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialism): "a philosophical movement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_movement) which posits that individual human beings create the meaning and essence of their lives" I don't claim to be a philosopher so if you want more read some Kierkegeard, Nietzsche, Satre or Camus or even just Wikipedia.

To put it bluntly the is no known meaning in life. Life just is. We make of it what we will. I am happy with the meaning I have created in my life. I've passed through the depression of existential doubt and come out the other side happier and more content havig shed the artificial certainties in paradoxical belief systems and embraced the joy of uncertainty.

[vbloke]

To a religious person there is an obvious point to life. What about to an atheist, as I assume many skeptics are. If we are a bundle of molecules wandering over an uncaring world for a few years, what is the point?
I don't know if there's a meaning to life, but the ultimate point to life is to pass genes onto your offspring, ensuring survival of your genetic pattern and the survival of the species as a whole.
That's a pretty altruistic thing to do, as your legacy is not benefiting you directly, but it is benefiting your descendants and helping to ensure that your species survives for as long as possible.

[Melanie]

I was about to say the very same thing - and add that once one has offspring, it's kind of important to give them an awareness of how remarkably odd this 'life' thing is, and help them make the most of it. Whatever you think about this world and the madness of crowds (war, stock markets, et al), it is a very beautiful world and it's not a waste of time to spend one's life appreciating it.

Unfortunately offspring don't usually take this kind of slush readily from parents - but trust me, you stand a much greater chance of getting the message across if you can hang around long enough to teach the lesson to your grand-offspring.

[Dr B]

I believe the philosophers known as "Monty Python" covered this topic very well.....;D


I'll get my coat......

[DrS]

Isn't it 42? ???

I'll get my coat too :undecided:

[Lord Muck oGentry]

To a religious person there is an obvious point to life.


What about to an atheist, as I assume many skeptics are.


If we are a bundle of molecules wandering over an uncaring world for a few years, what is the point?

I don't want to make too much of what may be a minor point in your post. But if the religious person's thought is that God's intentions, once known, logically settle the question of what we ought to want and do, then he is not obviously right but obviously wrong.

Atheists and believers are in the same position when they give point or purpose or meaning to life. Since they are persons, they can have purposes themselves and lend instrumental purpose to things- including their lives- that cannot in themselves have purposes. I suspect, however, that there are two main differences between believers and atheists. First, atheists are more likely to accept that we ourselves have to put the purposes in: the purposes won't put themselves in. Second, atheists are much less likely to assume that there has to be one big purpose rather than lots of little ones. Atheists are foxes, believers hedghogs ( " The fox knows many things; the hedgehog knows One Big Thing").

As to bundles of molecules: not everything that can intelligibly be said of us can intelligibly be said of what we are composed of. It makes sense to say, for example, that I intend to decorate the Christmas tree, but no sense to say the same of the molecules that I am composed of. Failure to see this point is, in fact, a version of the Fallacy of Composition/Division.

[ZERO]

My thoughts.

What is the point of life to a frog, or a rabbit?
To survive long enough to pass on its genes.

We are part of the animal kingdom and like a bat has unusually developed hearing or an elephant has a highly evolved trunk, we have a highly developed brain and can ask questions like yours.
That does not mean those questions have different answers.
To survive long enough to pass on our genes. Apart from that, it is up to the individual to find their own meaning.

[Mulder]

My thoughts.
What is the point of life to a frog, or a rabbit?
To survive long enough to pass on its genes.


So once you've had kids or you've decided not to have any, there is no further point to your life? I know that feeling well!


Failure to see this point is, in fact, a version of the Fallacy of Composition/Division.

I've committed a fallacy! There can be no lower point to which a skeptic can sink! No wonder I'm having trouble seeing any point to life.:sad:

[Lord Muck oGentry]

I've committed a fallacy! There can be no lower point to which a skeptic can sink! No wonder I'm having trouble seeing any point to life.:sad:

Oops, sorry! Didn't mean to have a dig at you. After all, you only asked a question. :smiley:

[ZERO]

So once you've had kids or you've decided not to have any, there is no further point to your life? I know that feeling well!

*sigh* Like a woo, you manage to avoid/miss the point in my post. :cheesy:

Apart from that, it is up to the individual to find their own meaning.

[Mulder]

*sigh* Like a woo, you manage to avoid/miss the point in my post. :cheesy:

Not really. I think it's an interesting point. After you've 'bred', is there any value to life?

[Janot]

After you've 'bred', is there any value to life?Well, the first half hour is rather relaxing ....:-*

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

Having children has made me realise my life is over :sad:

When I think how old I will be when they are my age, it is depressing.

Sorry to any old uns out there ;)

[ZERO]

Not really. I think it's an interesting point. After you've 'bred', is there any value to life?
To me, value and meaning are two different concepts.
I certainly value my life, but I don't think there is any meaning other than Darwinian.

[ZERO]

Not really. I think it's an interesting point.
After you've 'bred', is there any value to life?
Just had a thought and I may be wrong here...
...but, natural selection seems to have no value for life after breeding age. Deaths from natural causes seem to happen, for the most part, later in life.

?

[Lord Muck oGentry]

After you've 'bred', is there any value to life?

Depends on the liver.

[Cuddles]

Just had a thought and I may be wrong here...
...but, natural selection seems to have no value for life after breeding age. Deaths from natural causes seem to happen, for the most part, later in life.

The thing is, natural selection doen't act on you, it acts on your genes. Even if you're not capable of having any more children, you can still improve your children's, or other relatives', chance of survival. Of course, it all depends very much on how evolution has worked out in the past. Some species do die very soon after mating, mayflies being a fairly obvious example. On the other hand, some species live a long time after mating, and humans are far from alone in having nurseries where other adults look after children.

[Mulder]

So, the point of life is to carry on life! :smiley:

[bobdezon]

was sid james and hattie jacques in that one?

[Sceptic]

What is the point of life? ... what's the point of this forum? ...and er ...what am I doing here?

Cardinal Sceptic.

[Phil McKerracher]

I don't know if there's a meaning to life, but the ultimate point to life is to pass genes onto your offspring...
So, being childless, I guess my life has no meaning?

I beg to differ.

[seren]

Well no, he said he didn't know if life has a meaning. Just that we exist to pass in your genes to offspring.

I don't have kids either and I agree with him. The only thing in life that we're kind of built to do is survive and reproduce. There's no meaning in that and therefore no lack of meaning if you don't do it.

[Phil McKerracher]

The only thing in life that we're kind of built to do is survive and reproduce. There's no meaning in that ...
That's my point. To say life is "that which reproduces" is just a definition, it doesn't help us find any meaning or purpose at all. Personally, the reproduction aspect of it is completely irrelevant to me now, so it's no help at all even in the short term.

I think we atheists do have a more serious question to answer here. Believing as we do that we are totally insignificant in the overall scheme of things, why worry about world peace or the environment or anything else, when the rest of the universe won't even notice and even on earth, all trace of our existence will soon vanish? (Meanwhile, the theists are struggling to explain why we have free will if God controls everything, of course.)

People have struggled for millennia to extract meaning and purpose from patriotism, religion, ancestry, patterns in tea leaves or whatever, and they're kind of missing the point. You inevitably pick something to care about (for most life it's food!) and pursue it, but I maintain there's no ultimate goal, even for religious people. The Life of Brian people were right.

[darktil]

What is the point of life? There is no point. You are born you live and you die, that's it. Life is a game, it could be a great game but some ..... ran off with the dice!!!!

[seren]

Believing as we do that we are totally insignificant in the overall scheme of things, why worry about world peace or the environment or anything else, when the rest of the universe won't even notice and even on earth, all trace of our existence will soon vanish?

Weirdly somebody asked me that (or something amounting to that) quite recently. Well it was tigers actually. Someone asked him why we should care whether tigers become extinct and he had no answer. My answer (such as it was) was that if you decide tigers have no intrinsic value, why decide that humans do? If you decide it doesn't matter if tigers survive or not, why care whether humans do? And then where does that leave you?

Which is what you're getting at I suppose. The question really is, in light of that, what prevents us from topping ourselves en masse?

[I'm rambling...hey, it's four o'clock in the morning and I'm just brain-to-screen typing here]

It's got to be our biology. Our minds' inability to gain true perspective. It would be like stepping into the Total Perspective Vortex. Our brains are designed to assume we are the Zaphod Beeblebroxes of this universe. We actually can't fully conceive of our own futility. We're wonderfully designed to while away our days on trivialities. Ego and such. "Picking something to care about", as you said.

Man this is a depressing post.

Makes you wonder about the deep green Earth First types though. Where their thinking is at. Ho hum. Night all. Please don'tanybody commit suicide because of my post.

[Cuddles]

Weirdly somebody asked me that (or something amounting to that) quite recently. Well it was tigers actually. Someone asked him why we should care whether tigers become extinct and he had no answer. My answer (such as it was) was that if you decide tigers have no intrinsic value, why decide that humans do? If you decide it doesn't matter if tigers survive or not, why care whether humans do? And then where does that leave you?

This is why I never bother arguing about environmentalism. The trouble is, there really is no rational reason for trying to stop most things going extinct. There are only two arguments that even come close. Firstly, the completely selfish reason that tigers might be useful for something in the future. This works for various things like cows and trees, but for the majority of species, inclusing tigers, most people wouldn't even notice if they went extinct, let alone care. So what if we wipe out a million varieties of beetles? We haven't even found half of them yet.

The other argument is even weaker. Why kill them? If there's no good reason to kill tigers, why would you? This seems a sensible argument, since if there is no good reason to chop down forests and wipe out all the beetles you can find, it seems a rather odd thing to do it anyway. The problem with that is that many, probably most, people don't need a good reason to do most things. Why kill tigers? Because they're there. When it comes down to it, an awful lot of human pasttimes are completely pointless, so it's hard to use this argument without being rather hypocritical.

And the trouble is, there really are no other arguments for not killing tigers. If you really don't have anything better to do and doing it won't harm you in any way, what is a good reason for not killing them? The slippery slope argument doesn't really work. Tigers aren't humans. If I decide to kill humans, there are fairly severe consequences. If I decide to kill tigers, not so much.

When it comes down to it, the only reason any life, human or otherwise, has any meaning is because we say it has. Meaning exists only inside our brains, not in the world we observe with them.

The really annoying this is that I support conservation. I'm all for saving the whales, which makes it all the more annoying that there just doesn't seem to be any good reason for actually doing so. How can you argue with someone whose response to "Digging up that oil will kill poar bears." is "I don't like bears."?

[seren]

I don't disagree with you. I do agree the second point is extremely weak, because we're not really talking about actively killing them (or refusing to kill, whichever), but whether or not to care that they're all going to die. There's not a slippery slope from the latter to killing tigers or humans, just potentially into a slough of despond, and who wants to go to Slough?

I'm reminded of the story about the starfish (http://www.animalsvoice.com/PAGES/writes/editorial/essays/activism/starfish_story.html), though. I think that would be my reason. Alleviating suffering, because it sucks.

Sorry about the hokey story- it's for illustration porpoises* only. It took me ages to find one that didn't have dreadful addenda about how we all need to find our inner starfish or something.


*continuing the marine theme.

[Mulder]

Why should we conserve nature? Because who wants to live in a world consisting solely of concrete and full of people only interested in making money and following pointless fashions? There is something exciting about seeing an animal that is the product of aeons of evolution. By comparison a car or an office block simply does nothing for me. In fact, I think them ugly. I'd rather see mountains, fringed by forests and capped by clouds. My favourite place is the desert. Far from being the 'empty wasteland' that most people (usually those who've never been there) think, it is teeming with extraordinary life and spectacular scenery. Just going there and feeling its harshness takes you so far from humdrum city life that you feel totally alive for the first time.

I guess if you see a fox walking across your path on a city street and think 'get out of the way animal', you really won't get my point at all. If, instead, you watch, fascinated to know where it's going, where it's been, what it's thinking then maybe you'll get it. It's what science is all about - understanding nature. Destroy nature and we are just a bunch of sad automatons on a dead world.

[Cuddles]

I'm reminded of the story about the starfish (http://www.animalsvoice.com/PAGES/writes/editorial/essays/activism/starfish_story.html), though. I think that would be my reason. Alleviating suffering, because it sucks.


I haven't heard that one before. "It makes a different to me." I rather like that. However, it does highlight the futility of arguing about it. You're never going to convince, say, a fisherman to stop killing whales just because it makes a difference to you, especially if their livelihood relies on doing so.

[bobdezon]

There is something exciting about seeing an animal that is the product of aeons of evolution.

You mean 6,000 years of evolution right? ;)

[fallible]

That many?? Just kidding. There probably is no point to life beyond the passing on of genes except the point you make for yourself. Us humans are able to manufacture 'purpose' - 'I do good things', 'my job is important', I have people relying on me', 'I'm here to make a mark' and so on. Still, our legacy probably only lasts as long as the oldest person who remembers us is alive...unless we do something so remarkable that it becomes part of history. If recognition is important to you, I guess that's one of the points of life. But then it's late, I'm new and I have imbibed a fair bit of wine.

Hi bob. It's hellyp.
__________________
'It's hard, but you know it's worth the fight, 'Cause you know you've got the truth on your side. When the accusations fly, hold tight. Don't be afraid of what they'll say. Who cares what cowards think anyway? They will understand one day, one day.'
http://www.ukskeptics.com/forum/images/statusicon/user_online.gif http://www.ukskeptics.com/forum/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.ukskeptics.com/forum/report.php?p=27743) http://www.ukskeptics.com/forum/images/misc/progress.gif

[fallible]

;)Oops, double post. Beginner's nerves.

[SorryImPsychic]

...... I'm not looking for a grand Rather, I'm wondering what gives ordinary individual human lives any point?


The problem with us humans is that we want to ask questions like "what's the point".:'( Non-humans just get on with the business of living - and living to the fullest!

[filippo lippi]

You'd better believe it! I'm up early beacuse the amoebae in the puddle on the window-sill were partying 'til the early hours.

[darktil]

Life? It doesn't matter. Last year someone gave me a charming book by Roger Rosenblatt called ‘Ageing Gracefully’ I got it on my birthday. I did not appreciate the title at the time but it contains a series of rules for ageing gracefully. The first rule is the best. Rule number one is that ‘it doesn’t matter.’ ‘It doesn’t matter that what you think. Follow this rule and it will add decades to your life. It does not matter if you are late or early, if you are here or there, if you said it or didn’t say it, if you are clever or if you were stupid. If you were having a bad hair day or a no hair day or if your boss looks at you cockeyed or your boyfriend or girlfriend looks at you cockeyed, if you are cockeyed. If you don’t get that promotion or prize or house or if you do – it doesn’t matter.’ Wisdom at last. Then I heard a marvellous joke - A butcher was opening his market one morning and as he did a rabbit popped his head through the door. The butcher was surprised when the rabbit inquired ‘Got any cabbage?’ The butcher said ‘This is a meat market – we sell meat, not vegetables.’ The rabbit hopped off. The next day the butcher is opening the shop and sure enough the rabbit pops his head round and says ‘You got any cabbage?’ The butcher now irritated says ‘Listen you little rodent I told you yesterday we sell meat, we do not sell vegetables and the next time you come here I am going to grab you by the throat and nail those floppy ears to the floor.’ The rabbit disappeared hastily and nothing happened for a week. Then one morning the rabbit popped his head around the corner and said ‘Got any nails?’ The butcher said ‘No.’ The rabbit said ‘Ok. Got any cabbage?’

[Mulder]

Fancy a butcher imagining that a rabbit is a rodent? :smiley:

[darktil]

Don't take it so literary.

I think the butcher was just venting.

Chill.

Enjoy the humour.

You don't have to have a sense of humour to survive in this world.... But it sure helps.

[Toad]

At the lowest level, one of the core functions of life is simply to convert energy from one form to another. Perhaps that is the meaning of life, or perhaps life is simply a side effect of the Universe doing its thing.

Humans are higher evolved forms of life of course, but our purpose isn't necessarily any greater in Universal terms than that of an Amoeba.

If that doesn't float your boat, then I have this dusty book you could read - it says "Bile" on the cover, I think a letter has rubbed off ;)

Toad.

[ZERO]

If that doesn't float your boat, then I have this dusty book you could read - it says "Bile" on the cover, I think a letter has rubbed off ;)

Toad.
;D

[Nudles]

Pondering the meaning, point or reason to existence is akin to looking at a droplet of water falling down a large water fall and asking "What is the point of existence for the droplet of water?". A natural answer may be "To fall down the waterfall, to be that waterfall, because without many little droplets of water like the one in question, the waterfall would not be."

An arbitrary position, in every sense of the word, because there is no point, meaning or reason. Everything about what we see as a waterfall is a completely subjective arbitrary thing.

I guess you could say that we are only a sophisticated electrochemical reaction. In the absolute sense, a sophisticated electrochemical reaction with the "illusion" (in a "non-material" sense?) of consciousness and purpose. Nothing more nothing less.

Viewing procreation as the purpose is no less subjective and meaningless than seeing love, god or a spirit as a purpose. Having offspring may have its basis in objective reality, but it is no less arbitrary to use that as a purpose to life.

But of course we are still here, and don't live as though that is true. Being cursed with the human condition ;).


Ofcourse being all things arbritrary does not make all things equal, from an emperical and human perspective.


(You can ignore the following if you wish, it is a little off-topic and a little bit of a ramble)

Extrapolation:

For the sake of practicality we have to live life subjectively and admit we are doing so on some level. As brought up before about environmentalism, there is no objective reason to support it (in most cases?), so it is with all things (correct me if I am wrong). So we view life in a subjective manner and try and give rationale to our points of view. I do that by trying to view things through a scientific sceptic point of view, as that, to me,is the most practical way to get through day by day (the only way I know how and would never want it any other way). Admit to myself that I am human, and prone to the human condition, I have decided (willingly or not) to accept that as it is and just deal with that. I don't see that as a burden, just how things are. Which is why I guess I thirst for knowledge, even though I know when I die there will be nothing left of my illusion of conciousness. I am sure that is a reason why a lot of people yearn for a soul. "What is the point if there is nothing after we die? So there must be something!"

Being a human animal I live within my "programming", maybe because if I don't my crappy body will make me feel bad :tongue:?

I guess we have to be somewhat irrational to exist, or at least to continue existing in our current state (i.e humans and not earth). I think the major difference between a "skeptic" and a religious zealot is where you draw the line between rational ground and emotional ground in deciding what reality is. Be that a conscious or subconscious position.

All that aside, anyone else find it really annoying when you explain your position on things to someone, they ask you if you are okay, or if something is wrong ::)? Lol.

P.S. Great site, last time I looked at the uk skeptics scene was a few years ago it was a lot less active, and i think it was spelt with a c? lol. ^-^ Good to see it more active.