The Purpose of Life

The "I" may not be the vessel, but the vessel is controlled by the "I" in it. Which makes the vessel an integral "part" of the total "it" of this existence.

And the evidence still shows the "I" is not "it", but the "I" comes from, or was created by, some other "it".

What are "benjamins"???

 

^ lol what evidence?

all this backwards reasoning will leave you with nothing but a circle.

this can't be thought. it can only be felt.

 

The "I" is the Abyss of the "Vessel". Existentialism will question the meaning of temporalizing the Time the fullness against the edge. That's why there is no real abyss without the hindrance of the Others' present.

Therefore, there is also the regard of the ego for it Being anything at all: it is more than a soul; it is less than lacked being-in-itself, so that there is an unconscious being of the inner self or some sense for worldhood: the concern of being in the World.

We just must explain the abyss to know if "Being in the World" is dead or alive.

 

The "evidence" is what we can honestly "feel" with what senses we are possessed of.

Also, feeling requires/inspires thought.

Could you explain how my reasoning is backward?

 

I am not trying to be intolerant of you. But do you want to write, do you want to impress people in the public domain of the communication, or do you want to impress a 'gal?

Thus I am not in the position to know if you aren't forwardly atuned to the values of the rest of the people.

 

Adventitious sensory input is really nothing to base philosophical thought upon.

Assuming you want to be rational.

 

So, if we're being rational, what should we base philosophical thought upon?

To sathead:
Yes, I want to write.

No, I'm not interested in impressing people in the public domain.

No, I'm not interested in impressing a gal (I've got my own gal, we've been married for 31 years).

If we get too concerned with "the values of the rest of the people", we tend to lose our own values.

 

For existentialism (from which there may no better appreciation of the Philosophy of Man; all Philosophy is doomed to failure) it must be realized constantly that our feelings succeed the Ego to the incompleteness of the feeling itself (Feeling-in-itself), which is the feeling of general inspiration: One with all the Others.

The people are on Earth; the people are in Heaven; last but not least, the people can make me believe What I Want in relation to the Purpose of Life.

Yes, that is the question about the success and failure, rise and fall, and the morality and inevitable distrust. But don't you believe in Them to fit in or to being trustworthy ( a matter of appropriate behavour or interpretation????).

 

Famewalk:
Do you mean existentialism believes feelings succeed truth? or possibly feelings are truth?

Fitting in can be a dangerous thing to try to do (just look at the German populace of the 1930's & 40's).

Being trustworthy requires a basic truth to trust in.

Appropriate behavior also requires a standard, so as to judge the difference between "appropriate & inappropriate".

What would you interpret if all that mattered were your feelings? or if your feelings were the interpretation, no final interpretation would really matter.

 

Hundred dollar bills :cheers2:

 

Relayer;
Thanks for the heads up.

So, I guess that means life is all about the money/value?

You don't sound like much of an existentialist

 

The basic truth for trustworthiness was authenticity, which takes a historical reference; it may also be the momentary serious concern (look into the Consicousness for scientific possibilities).

But why are all of our tasks for the present existing possibilities so empty (not the possibilities but the tasks in the politcal basis of economic discussions)? We have to be educated to be invited, but the Money always continues to be an evolution of oncoming intolerance from the Others.

Relayer, you seem to mean that communication is hidden by the wealth of money so well that any knowledge of how it works is an empty evaluation in realistic terms. That is what it means to approach tasks from the givenness of consuming wealth: money is the task dropped from heaven for the earthly responsibility of the sharable Task. Relayer wants to be a spiritualist, I gather; and the existentialist is without task for the money projected for anyone of recognized worth in tasks.

Who was trustworthy that way? Existentialism is about the waste of money though.

 

Nah I was just kidding. Life is all about winning the World Series! :cheers2:

 

Money is just a manmade representation of value and the task of producing value (which is represented by money in our society) is as worthy as any other task.

It's when you love the money itsself that you begin to generate a root from which all evil grows.

P.S. It was a lopsided Series this year

 

Naaa...ah. The losers: the Tampa Bay team didn't ev'n know they were playing for money.

 

the purpose of life is to have as many people as possible to attend to your funeral

 

Guess I failed then......

 

I'd say the purpose of life is how we frame it. To live with the fewest worry's or demands equals happiness.

 

the purpose of life i think doesnt matter but us as a whole still have yet to figure it out since there still is a great deal of unhappiness in the world! that being said i would think the purpose is to simply come together and unify but appears to be a monumental task you think?

 

Has anyone thought that me and you to copulate, to survive and prosper beyond all ambitions of our peers and family members before us and then to lay something down for our children in turn is the reason to exist forefront...i mean to say the 9-5 2.4 children thing might not be such a bad thing after all.