Shadowdarke wrote:

Been reading much Freud lately?

Not a bit...

Our existence is a huge collection of "meaningless" loops. Everything is a cycle, from the circle of life, to our planet revolving around the sun. Popular theory even suggests that time and the universe itself are repeating cycles.

The lack of meaning is an invention of the human mind. Life does not need meaning to happen. "Meaning" requires a thinking observer and is open to the interpretation of that observer. What is the meaning of this bottle of Member's Mark Natural Spring Water I am drinking? Every person will have their own interpretation, and likely no one will give metaphysical answers.

Defining "meaning" as being something beyond our power... Some predetermined purpose for us being here... And I say there is no such thing (denying a higher power, in essence... and since I consider myself to be an atheist...I'm perfectly comfortable with that...lol) I'm not saying that a person can't name a "meaning" for their life... I'm saying that based on the accepted interpretation of that question...life is meaningless...

It's exactly that sort of freedom in finding the "meaning" of life that makes me say that there isn't one... If it can be different for everyone...then it doesn't exist outside their own minds...

So my original statement that life is truly meaningless still holds true...

What about people who choose not to have children? Are they somehow "unnatural"? (I guess that would mean they are supernatural. ;) ) Do creatures that can not breed have no purpose in life? Do mules have any less "meaning" than donkeys?

As for those who choose to not have children... I say that yes, they are unnatural...lol Or perhaps dysfunctional is a better term...lol

The single goal of life is to make more life... Life preserves itself in order to accomplish that goal (most lower creatures simply die right after mating...their ultimate goal accomplished)... If a human chooses to not strive for that goal...then they are making an unnatural decision... I'm not saying that they are wrong for doing so (as I myself have no desire to have children)...but they are going against the natural order of things...

But it's all due to our rather unntural ability to think that leads to all of our deviation from our true path in life... We are essentially animals...and under normal circumstances...we'd be following all of the same rules that the rest of the living world follows... But we've grown the abnormal ability to make our own rules and ignore those that bind other creatures... We're basically freaks of nature...lol Strip away all of that unnatural thought and we'd be acting just like the rest of the animal kingdom... Reproduction would be the number one priority... (in fact...we're even built around that priority... the human lifespan would be a lot shorter than it was if not for our unnatural technology... we'd all be dead shortly after coming into sexual maturity and having our chance to mate if not for our rather artificial means of extending the human life...

How many other animals grow old enough to begin to degenerate as much as a human is capable of? We can age to the point that our bodies no longer work...and past that... Lesser creatures simply die once they reach those sorts of states... We would too if not for our unnatural technology...

The meaning of life is a debate for philosophers and has been going on since prehistory. The bottom line is: as thinking beings, if we seek a meaning for our life, all we must do is define it for ourselves and work for it.

Very true... But you're using a different "meaning" than I was...

AbyssDragon wrote:

I just finished reading one of Hofstadter's other books ("Metamagical Themas"). It's essentially a gigantic tome of whatever Hofstadter finds interesting. The bulk of which is made up of articles he wrote for Scientific American, so it doesn't have very much of a "book" structure, just a large listing of neat things. Anyway, I liked it almost as much as GEB, but it kind of goes un-talked about so a lot of people haven't read it. You should definately give it a look if you haven't already.

-AbyssDragon

I have that as well. I like the game he proposes called "Nomus" (I think). The book overall was hard to get through though... aside from its gigantic proportions (in hard-cover, especially), there isn't much structure.

Have you read "The Mind's I?" It's by Hofstadter and Daniel Dennet, and is the easiest read of the three. It also has some sections from GEB, but a lot of other interesting short fiction to illustrate fascinating concepts.

How about a game where you can create your own species. You could select methods of getting food, defense, reproduction etc. and them leave them to roam around the world for a while. Then other players create creatures that interact with your creatures in different ways, eg. easier food, predators. The idea of the game would be to have a creature that would survive the longest.

If no-one else bothers than I will but I think it would be pretty cool.