Posts Tagged ‘meaning of life’

What type of ideology could possibly create unity?

Friday, January 15th, 2021

This question was posted in a forum and it is un discussion, here:

This is my post:

The one that emerges from Matrix/DNA world view. Resumed: ” We are 8 billion brothers-genes half-conscious that, with more zillions of other less or more conscious brother-genes spread in this Universe, are building and nurturing this fetus of extra-universal consciousness, located at our brain-placenta inside this head-egg. As a universal gene, each human, even the poorest, is a genetic information, unique, specific, indestructible, not transferable, it is the mission of each one to work and to insert his/her information into this great process of universal reproduction of the unknown thing that triggered that act of fecundation called Big Bang. If a unique brother in this Universe could not accomplish its mission, all of us that will be the baby born at the Day of the Big Birth, we would be a hand capped being… and I suspect that the unknown pregnant thing will take medicine for not permitting it. So, give to your life and behavior the meaning of existence of genes. Look to each human or conscious alien as how you look yourself and understand her/him as you understand yours desires, necessities, this is empathy. Never do anything that can prejudices a brother in the most faraway places of Africa or USA or any other place, which could limit its freedom or material capacity for accomplish its mission. And have a long, healthy, prosperous life my brother, because I need you happy in good standing as I need myself.” – This world view discovered this meaning of life applying the method of comparative anatomy among all-natural systems, from atoms, to galaxies, to living beings, so, there is no scientific or philosophical way to debunk it…

Mohan Katarki – The society cannot be united as one unit. However, unity in diversity can be achieved, if the freedom of individuals is recognised, if the dignity of individuals is respected and if the individuals are treated equally.

Answer by Louis Charles Morelli:

Mohan Katarki – Who will be in charge for judging and executing it? Diversity of groups are like distinct parts, pieces, organs of a unique system each one more specialized at one systemic function. Each system has a control identity, keeping the internal homeostasis, equilibrium. Who will be in the control? So, the unique way for a working unite will be no system at all, must have an international Congress, every decision being voted by all individuals. Oh… no… the majority always make mistakes… For example: I think it is wrong sending all money for food to the poorest and no money for spatial exploration like NASA. The majority will think another way… Really this is a difficult human dilema…

Sunday, December 1st, 2019

The Purpose Of Life Is Not Happiness: It’s Usefulness

Darius ForouxOct 3, 2016

Tome cuidado ao ler este artigo. O autor omite muitos detalhes importantes que se relatam ao aasunto, principalmente os negativos. Como pode ser visto no post critico copiado abaixo de Mira Lazine.

My post in the comment section:

Go to the profile of TheMatrixDNA
TheMatrixDNAA – Dec 1 – 19

I solved this issue – what to do with my life, when suspecting that I am like a gene. From the Universe perspective, I really must be a gene. One million monkeys/genes self-projected themselves when building the human species genes and now, 8 billion humans genes are building a fetus of consciousness. I don´t know what characteristic of this fetus I am responsible for and which shape of being we are building… genes never know. I know that I am different from the other 7,99 billion humans in a tiny detail, and this detail is the genetic information I was built for doing my job. So, it seems the right way leaving the life carrying us on, our information will be expressed some way. But… there is a problem. There are genes that tries to escape out from its mission for getting a life of pleasure. This is the human going after his/her happiness. It is a selfish being turned into a closed system in itself. I can´t explain here, but this is a wrong choice with hard price to pay in the dimension of that fetus of consciousness. After this meaning of life I changed my behavior. I don´t care about big houses, expansive cars, beautiful clothes, nothing has value. I want only to discover new tasks that can help any human being to who poverty, oppression, etc., are avoiding them to be the gene they are, to build the characteristic they are modeled to. Doing it I fell happy because I am being useful to the great ex-machine target.


Mira Lazine — Underground Socialist

Mira Lazine — Underground SocialistSep 15, 2018 · 

This post is really problematic and has incredibly dangerous applications of the philosophy spilled — let me explain.

Encouraging people to be ‘useful’ is a very utilitarian philosophy, encouraging a sort of ‘net good’ being given out of someone’s life in order for it to have a sort of purpose. It’s not an uncommon view, it’s been detailed in philosophy for centuries, but it’s incredibly troubling for a multitude of reasons.

First, it implies that people who don’t live a ‘useful’ life have essentially no purpose, have done nothing with themselves and been a useless addition to the world. I don’t know about you, but save for the absolute most heinous of people in history, I wouldn’t describe anyone in a light that implied their life has a sort of value. Everyone’s life is worth something, it has an intrinsic value to it — it’s something that should be recognized and appreciated, not be given a moral price tag. I don’t believe you, the author of this, feel otherwise — most people don’t, but it’s an undoubted result of this sort of philosophy.

Secondly, it ignores those who physically *cant* be ‘useful,’ such as say those trapped in poverty, those dealing with debilitating disabilities or mental illness that prevents them from making any sort of ‘useful’ impact. It needn’t be said that millions in poverty, with disabilities, with mental illness make amazing impacts to the world and to history — no one argues otherwise — but of course many lack the resources to do anything but to barely make ends meet, to be able to get through the day, and so essentially it implies that they have no ‘use’ and live a worthless life. Again, I don’t at all take you for having this position, but it’s something that falls from what you argue.

Thirdly, and this one is incredibly important I feel, encouraging ‘usefulness’ as opposed to ‘happiness’ is really troubling considering it’ll only lead people to do things they believe are morally good at the cost of their own well-being. That’s not a life that ought to be encouraged — it’s built around constructs of virtue that only end up bringing someone down instead of up. Since you do things that are ‘useful’ because you want to leave a positive impact and want to better the world, I’m sure you agree that people living their lives contrary to how they’d like (provided that how they like doesn’t harm others) isn’t exactly a solid ideal.

None of this is to say that encouraging action, encouraging people to make a difference is bad; it isn’t at all. I try to promote the same thing and to live by it myself, but it isn’t contrary to an overall pursuit of happiness; if anything it’s completely in line with it. We all want to make the world a better place, so why don’t we make it a happier one for everyone?