It's a totally false dichotomy to say that "meaning" (as if it were an object unto itself) is either something objectively "out there", external but perhaps accessible to humanity, or completely nonexistent.
Why, if meaning exists to us "only in our minds" should it be considered any less "real" in terms of how we experience "meaningfulness"? EVERYTHING we understand, believe, experience, feel, relate to -- it all happens through mental processes.
A lot of this is based on that false dichotomy, and much is also based on the false premise that if there isn't one big, grand unifying answer to the question, "What does this all mean?", that the fractional, individualized, less grandiose meanings we all feel and experience in daily life are somehow diminished to unimportance. What necessitates that?
And besides, everyone knows that the answer to life, the universe, and everything is 42.
Dude, no. This is wrong. When will a lie ever be moral? When will it ever be moral to be dumb?Quote:
Morals exist but they are no natural laws, they emerged out of necessity, social creatures need something that governs social interaction and societies need a moral base to stand upon (agreeable behavior of individuals in a group context). But Morals change depending on the times and societies. It's also a learned trait no one is born with morals.
Reality doesn't exist. Our perception distorts "reality", but since we have only our perception we have to assume that this is reality.
Are perception is real.
I don't take acid.
Get this, PSD having been, well here, makes it so nothing can never ever ever occur. Ever. No matter what something had been. My view on nihilist is they are sadistic, and go to hell. They are lies, those who ponder nothing MUST KNOW IT CAN'T POSSIBLY BE!
CRIMINALS! Get em