Maybe when you die it’s like a file being deleted. You don’t cease to exist suddenly, you just disappear from the world to be gradually overwritten by history, swallowed by space. Maybe a ghost is just a deleted file, an empty space-suit roaming around the universe without the dictates of physics.What words of comfort would you lend me if one day, in some corner of the galaxy you encounter my lonely deleted soul floating about somnolently, drifting slowly as a thin and greying cloud, shivering like a thin old man in the wind, and sobbing, sobbing at my monumental loneliness? I hope you will remind me that it will only be a matter of time, yes only a matter of time until the oxygen-free wind of ones and zeros will infiltrate my spacesuit, out here in this infinite tapestry of ones and zeros. And I’ll be drowned out by the noise of galactic explosions, and the blinding colors of supernovas. Overwritten by this holographic universe, gone and forgotten forever.
This phenomenon, of thinking of something or someone, and then it happening, or that person say contacting you, is so widely anecdotally experienced and reported through history that ive always suspected there is something more to it than purely coincidence. Afterall, there are few coincidences in nature. In a purely statistical sense, any outcome is possible, but in the real world, if a dice lands on the same side 1000 times in a row, there is probably some underlying physical phenomenon causing the distortion from what is expected.
Now of course the intellectually-vogue response is to say that since we can’t experimentally verify such things with evidence, they ought to be dismissed without evidence. By the very nature of this supposed ‘psychic’ phenomenon, it is necessarily random, and so could not replicated experimentally. Just because it cannot be experimentally verified, does that mean that it should be dismissed and is necessarily false? I doubt it.
In fact, based on what we know about the ‘mind’, it doesn’t seem necessarily unreasonable to me to suspect that minds can alter physical events, or at least, other brains.
Why is it controversial to speculate that thoughts can cause physical events to happen? Thoughts already do cause physical events to happen. Thinking of lifting your arm, so far as we know, causes your arm to lift. So it seems that brains give rise to some property(a mind) that is able to in turn cause physical changes in at least that brain. If there’s some property of ‘minds’ that can physically effect brains, and there’s some property of brains that is susceptible to input from minds, why exclude even the possibility that that property can cause physical changes in other brains?
Me: At some point you may wake up one morning and realize that you don’t have much time left. And you’ll stop caring. You’ll just stop caring.
Other person: About what? That’s exactly the thing- if I value every living being life, if I put myself in every set of shoes, than I don’t have just one life
Me: You’ll realize it’s just not so.
And you have only yourself.
And nothing matters.
Nothing matters at all.
Stupid depressing person making me step out of the elaborate framework of distractions I’ve constructed, called being busy.
I wish I could forget, I wish I could forget. But you can’t unknow once you know.
See you have this chronic problem, which is the tragedy of existence, and you can ignore it and pretend like it going to go away, but it’s not. It’s only going to get worse. And there’s absolutely nothing you could conceivably do to solve this problem
Oh how I wish I was just a dumb cat or goldfish, enjoying life in a field or a nice pond somewhere.
Just as any task like going to work has an instrumental value, religion gives life itself and it’s every task such a value
The perfect life is to devote ones life toward goals in instrumental activities, and then die during the process. Instrumental activities are the greatest distraction from the phenomenon of life passing by, and also lend life itself meaning. The meaning of life is striving toward goals in instrumental activities. This is why something like charity is so fulfilling and makes life worth while…it provides a clear framework of achievable goals for instrumental activities.
Those of us who have no clear goals toward which we can engage in instrumental activities, usually lack enough moment to moment immediate pleasure to lead all in all pleasurable lives
Religious practice itself provides the guidelines for instrumental activities of which the goal is to serve god. One with religion is never without a potential instrumental activity to engage in and in doing so live a meaningful life.
Anything which seeks to replace religion must provide a similar framework of goals and instrumental activities so as to provide the follower with a meaningful life
Thought of this walking home. Fucking existential angst. All the time bothering me
People try to define themselves with various ideologies, religions etc
But one can’t define oneself. One can only describe oneself.
To lead a fulfilling life is to strike a balance between knowledge of the fact that you may die at any moment, and knowledge that the possible future, needs attending to. The ultimate goal in life being optimized pleasure, people devise various life strategies in light of these conflicting facts. Gambling with their time and resources, some minimize minor immediate pleasure and place their bet on a possible tremendously pleasurable future. Others gamble more conservatively and ‘live for the moment’, devoting varying amounts of time and resources toward immediate pleasure. Society tends to look down on the latter sort of people, not because they’ve made any less of a prudent life-choice, but because the society itself will not survive without its members betting on pleasurable futures. This is the only reason that society discourages conservative life-gambling.