|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2007 4:56 pm
1. Sometimes I wonder what it would be like to see the world through the eyes of someone else. I believe that when you see a picture you can't really see it entirely. I feel your mind, based on your personality, picks out and highlights the things you most wish to see. But if we could see the entire picture, unaltered by our minds, would we be overwhelmed? Would we be washed with such an overwhelming amount of different feelings at what we see we cannot take it? Or would we be feeling such a variety of different feelings we actually feel nothing at all? Sorry, this probably doesn't make sense at all, but oh well, i felt like saying it anyway.
2. I always wonder to myself, what is the meaning of existence? What is existence? Why do things exist? Why is there an Earth, why is there a universe, why is there a galaxy? Sure there are scientific explanations for these, but how did the materials to build, for instance, an Earth even form? Why do they exhist today? Everything has a cause and effect in our world, but the cause of existence, what is it? We are living in its effect, but why can't we figure out the cause of our very roots of living?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 8:30 pm
for #1: You don't need to just look through somebody else's EYES for that -- you'd need to actually BE them for a while, or sort of "read their mind," because as long as you are using your own mind it will still result in the same old perspective you'd have had just as yourself. And I don't think it would be an "overload" to see something without personal judgments upon it -- really I think you'd be UNDERwhelmed rather then OVERwhelmed. To see something and make no personal judgements upon it would really just mean you got even LESS information from the picture then usual. You'd have no feelings about it at all because any reaction you get would be a personal response, and you were specifically trying not to have any personal views upon the picture.
for #2: If you keep looking for those answers outside yourself you're looking in all the wrong places and will never get the answer. Your life, your existence in this world -- the meaning of it is up to you to dictate. If your asking about a "purpose" in life, that's for each to decide for themselves. We all decide what our own goals are, but keep in mind all these things are always decided upon with one ultimate end in mind, as was first articulated by Aristotle, people do everything in life with the goal of personal happiness. So everybody does things to become happy depending upon what it is they think will make them happiest. As for the universe and the galaxy's "purpose" -- as they can not think, they can not decide on a purpose for themselves, they have no will, they do no things purposefully, so they don't have a purpose of their own. At best, their "purpose" is just serving those that HAVE purposes defined to themselves in existing as a place in which they will live out their quest for happiness and try to do all those things they want to. As for HOW they all got here, that's still under investigation and a strictly scientific matter, not philosophical in nature outside the manner in which science itself is philosophically viewed - the scientific method, need for proof, facts as independent of perception but possible for people to perceive and all that jazz.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:54 pm
your cause and effect thing gave me an idea that may sound crazy but here if the effect is what we go through and all that then the cause of that is living it may seem simple but think about it
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:39 pm
I have to agree with bluecherry, and I have the same wonders sometimes. There are some days when I just become so aware of my own existence that I have to wonder what it would be like to be someone other than me.
Blacklove666- we can't be our own cause, that doesn't make sense. you say that the cause of existence is living it right?
That's circular...
"we exist because we exist." It is simple, and I think it may be a little too simple. We don't exist because of experience we experience because we exist...
sorry, I guess I just disagree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:01 pm
3nodding Yeah, I think the problem here is some confusion in how the thought process happened on this issue and maybe a little bit of a confusion or cause and effect logical fallacy. We live and as we live we have experiences, but to try to then go back and say living causes existence is getting it backward and muddled. It goes like this: exist -> live -> experience. (Note that is the order of occurrence though, not necessarily direct cause and effect, since not all that exists is alive clearly, but to be alive you need to exist first for example.) It does not go: exist <- live -> experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 10:02 pm
That's exactly it! mrgreen Blackcherry!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
